In the modern lexicon of societal atrocities, overlapping definitions may avail for some agencies while only confusing the citizens who pay taxes and find themselves just as dead whether felled by terrorist, extremist, or criminal. What are the distinctions anyway, especially if one seeks a basic grasp of where these terms get applied to villains and villainies that are the hallmark of equal-opportunity cutthroats?
Consider this diagram that draws out distinctions while drawing an oval over areas of overlap:
Crime and fear of crime are the most familiar. As Steven Lab has told us [1], they have bedeviled society to the point of becoming an irremovable thread of the social fabric (my formulation, not Lab's).
Terrorism, although a more modern term in its circulation, nevertheless traces to a long pedigree that, in its essence, differs from crime in what Boaz Ganor highlights as its political objective [2].
What of extremism, a barbarism of bureaucratic utility to those seeking to affix a pejorative label on transgressions that may not qualify as terrorism, yet command insufficient notice (and funding) if allowed to languish as a sapling made invisible in a forest of crime?
It helps to wrestle these cranky definitions to a mat of logical distinctions if one sees them in a certain light. In this framing, crime becomes a prohibited act, or even the neglect of a necessary act. Crime's manifestations may well approach infinity, which means sometimes they will no doubt share features with less pervasive horrors like terrorism and extremism.
As for distinguishing the isms, it may avail to regard terrorism as an act, which typically targets noncombatants and always furthers a political objective. By contrast, think of extremism as a measure of intensity. How so? Definitions of extremism, murky at best and often an affront to tautology, characterize this as a state of being "extreme," hence presumptively imbalanced or radically succumbing to some polarized position that would defy reason and invite danger. Invariably, the label is subjective. [3] "Extremism" as such is a term easier to brandish against opponents than to define with objective precision. But if one absorbs it into one's lexicon in the interest of remaining au courant, one may grudgingly do so under the foregoing characterization.
Overlap
Terrorism, extremism, and crime overlap when terrorists, extremists, and criminals use violence. Do the perpetrators define themselves by one of these labels? Maybe. Maybe not. More likely, government agencies reacting to their attacks apply whichever label yields the greatest advantage in thwarting the attackers. Experience suggests that violence is the sine qua non for terrorists; otherwise, their actions would raise no eyebrows and attract few adherents.
Criminals have more diversity in their ranks. Since their aim is more geared to realizing a personal benefit than to advancing a cause, criminals retain the flexibility to play to their strengths. Thus, a world-class embezzler is unlikely to resort to violent crime. As a rule, fraud and nonviolent crime pay better and pose less of a penalty if caught and sentenced.
Who are extremists? People who are passionate or zealous to a fault? If this is their only failing, then it is difficult to brand them as dangerous -- unless they begin to pose a danger to society that translates to a threat of violence. An extreme lover of puns is a bore and a nuisance. An extreme lover of puns who insists on reciting his favorites to an audience held hostage at gunpoint is quite another creature. Perhaps he now qualifies as the "extremist" for which the term was intended. Add to his hostage-taking a political objective interspersed between his puns, and does he now qualify for promotion to "terrorist"?
The answer, a default for any seasoned consultant: It depends.
Notes:
[1] S. Lab, Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices, and Evaluations, 3rd Edition (Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing, 1997) pp. 1-14.
[2] B. Ganor, The Counter-Terrorism Puzzle: A Guide for Decision Makers,
(London: Transaction Publishers, 2005) p. 9.
[3] P. T. Coleman & A. Bartoli (2003). Addressing Extremism, The International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Resolution, Colombia University (2003), p. 2. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/i/a/document/9386_WhitePaper_2_Extremism_030809.pdf
