Choosing Violence or Nonviolence: Attractiveness and Unattractiveness
in Strategic Decision-Making
Political parties and terrorist organizations are recognized most often as different
types of political groups, which utilize opposing strategies to achieve their political goals.
Political parties are often defined, at least in part, as political groups that utilize
nonviolent strategies, while terrorist organizations are often recognized as political
groups that use violent strategies.
In this way, political groups are defined by the
strategies they are expected to employ.
Based on this distinction, more often than not, studies of political parties and
terrorist organizations are conducted separately, limiting opportunities for comparative
analyses of these political groups and, on occasion, masking similarities between them.
This practice is facilitated by students of political parties, who challenge the
comparability of political parties and terrorist organizations. This occurs less through
direct dialogue than through its avoidance. Drawing in part from the opposing strategic
choices most often attributed to political parties and terrorist organizations, distinctions
between these political groups are based frequently on divergent assessments of each
group’s legitimacy and political objectives. Political parties are viewed as legitimate
participants in political systems. Most political parties aggregate diverse interests and
compete for popular support and political office in order to influence domestic politics.
Due to their public nature, political parties are relatively transparent in their operations
and organization. Political parties also serve as key components of democratic political
1
Weinberg (1991: 423, 424).
2
Ware (1996: 1-6).
3
Convention