The world economy and global systemic terrorism.

[DrBeer]

There is no arbitrary terrorism capable of affecting the levels of the economy in this way as in the examples cited by the OP. It is organized terrorism funded by countries and international lobbies that benefit from it.
I want us to differentiate in our analysis between individual terrorist incidents that are in the form of isolated activity by one individual or a small group, and international organizations that are described as terrorism by their enemies. The most common example of these organizations is ISIS, which suddenly appeared as an independent movement that obtains funding for equipment and fighters from sources that are still unknown to this day. This organization, which caused devastation in vast areas of Syria and Iraq, was operating according to tight regulatory frameworks, and some official authorities still refuse to classify it as a terrorist organization on the grounds that it shares the same ideology.

All these factions and currents did not appear by themselves, but at a certain moment, and for certain purposes. And of course not as "a group of unfortunate disadvantaged residents of the country, ready to overthrow the hated government and build a garden of Eden in their country".

Terror is about power and influence in the first place. Terrorism is a systemic, savage, inhuman position to seize power and install a certain regime. Terrorist groups/regimes have NO ECONOMIC programs. There are goals of personal enrichment and personal unlimited power.
And to achieve such goals requires chaos, lack of laws, and ... LACK OF ECONOMY, and an acceptable standard of living for the population. Why? Because it is virtually impossible to convert an educated, well-off, mentally developed person into a supporter of terrorism and convince him to strap on explosives and blow himself up in a crowd of peaceful people .... But a poor, undeveloped, "offended at the whole world" person - he has nothing to lose, and if he is brainwashed by propaganda that explains his problems and shows the "enemy", and if it is mixed up with religious or national issues - he will do it.... And most importantly, he may well give up a normal life in favor of the fairy tales of the "leader", and such a resident does not need a good economy, medicine, high life expectancy, good work.
That is why terrorism in most cases comes from poor, economically backward, poorly educated countries/regions/societies....

[coupable]

There is no arbitrary terrorism capable of affecting the levels of the economy in this way as in the examples cited by the OP. It is organized terrorism funded by countries and international lobbies that benefit from it.
I want us to differentiate in our analysis between individual terrorist incidents that are in the form of isolated activity by one individual or a small group, and international organizations that are described as terrorism by their enemies. The most common example of these organizations is ISIS, which suddenly appeared as an independent movement that obtains funding for equipment and fighters from sources that are still unknown to this day. This organization, which caused devastation in vast areas of Syria and Iraq, was operating according to tight regulatory frameworks, and some official authorities still refuse to classify it as a terrorist organization on the grounds that it shares the same ideology.

All these factions and currents did not appear by themselves, but at a certain moment, and for certain purposes. And of course not as "a group of unfortunate disadvantaged residents of the country, ready to overthrow the hated government and build a garden of Eden in their country".

Terror is about power and influence in the first place. Terrorism is a systemic, savage, inhuman position to seize power and install a certain regime. Terrorist groups/regimes have NO ECONOMIC programs. There are goals of personal enrichment and personal unlimited power.
And to achieve such goals requires chaos, lack of laws, and ... LACK OF ECONOMY, and an acceptable standard of living for the population. Why? Because it is virtually impossible to convert an educated, well-off, mentally developed person into a supporter of terrorism and convince him to strap on explosives and blow himself up in a crowd of peaceful people .... But a poor, undeveloped, "offended at the whole world" person - he has nothing to lose, and if he is brainwashed by propaganda that explains his problems and shows the "enemy", and if it is mixed up with religious or national issues - he will do it.... And most importantly, he may well give up a normal life in favor of the fairy tales of the "leader", and such a resident does not need a good economy, medicine, high life expectancy, good work.
That is why terrorism in most cases comes from poor, economically backward, poorly educated countries/regions/societies....

Your position is correct and has many examples in reality, but unfortunately it cannot be generalized to all systems because we did not define the concept of “terrorism” from the beginning of our discussion. This means that if we consider terrorist activities to be everything that can be done for the purpose of intimidation, then this will apply to most countries and ruling systems, in which terrorism can take different forms. On the other hand, the practice of terrorism can be for strategic goals and not just personal benefits for the terrorists. What is happening in Palestine today is the greatest example of this, since Israel as an entity (not individuals) is practicing intimidation against the original owners of the land in order to achieve their great dream of establishing a homeland for the Jews in Palestine.

[kryptqnick]

Terrorism does seem to be on the rise, but it seems more of a political than an economic matter to me. The problem is that the international community if often not unified enough and not determined enough to call out terrorism, decisively condemn it, and ensure punishment of those who use it as a method and those who support such usage. The economic part does somewhat kick in when there are attempts to limit terrorism by working on preventing financing of terrorism, and in some cases (as with Russia), it can have significant global economic impact. Of course, terrorism also has a very negative local impact, as investors don't normally want to put their money into states that endorse terrorism.

[DrBeer]

Your position is correct and has many examples in reality, but unfortunately it cannot be generalized to all systems because we did not define the concept of “terrorism” from the beginning of our discussion. This means that if we consider terrorist activities to be everything that can be done for the purpose of intimidation, then this will apply to most countries and ruling systems, in which terrorism can take different forms. On the other hand, the practice of terrorism can be for strategic goals and not just personal benefits for the terrorists. What is happening in Palestine today is the greatest example of this, since Israel as an entity (not individuals) is practicing intimidation against the original owners of the land in order to achieve their great dream of establishing a homeland for the Jews in Palestine.

I won’t try to be clever and try to describe in my own words what has already been accurately described, but I will give an excerpt:

Terrorism is a policy based on the systematic use of terror.

Synonyms for the word “terror” (from the Latin terror - “fear”, “horror”) are the words “violence”, “intimidation”, “intimidation”. This word became common in various states and countries after the “Period of Terror” during the French Revolution.

Despite the legal force of the term “terrorism,” it does not have a clear definition. However, the most common opinion defines this term as: “the achievement of political, ideological, economic and religious goals by violent means.”

In US law, it is defined as premeditated, politically motivated violence committed against civilians or targets by federal-level subnational groups or clandestine agents and organizations, usually with the goal of influencing the mood of society.


According to this description, it is very difficult to “stretch” it across all countries... My personal opinion!

[Natsuu]

Terrorism messes up economies big time. It scares people, makes businesses uncertain, and drives up security costs. When there's an attack, tourism drops, investments slow, and trade gets affected. It's like a chain reaction of economic problems. It really fristrates me when it happens to some parts of our country. It messes with the people. And yes. countries need to work together, share info and beef up security. But I think it is more than that. We have to address root problems within our country first like poverty and inequality, promoting education and fostering understanding between different groups can go a long way in preventing extremism. Governments should do better. It's like a team effort to keep our economies and communities safe

[DrBeer]

Terrorism does seem to be on the rise, but it seems more of a political than an economic matter to me. The problem is that the international community if often not unified enough and not determined enough to call out terrorism, decisively condemn it, and ensure punishment of those who use it as a method and those who support such usage. The economic part does somewhat kick in when there are attempts to limit terrorism by working on preventing financing of terrorism, and in some cases (as with Russia), it can have significant global economic impact. Of course, terrorism also has a very negative local impact, as investors don't normally want to put their money into states that endorse terrorism.

Just recently I thought so too. But having looked at the situation more broadly, I have the opinion that now, in order to ultimately achieve goals, they use economic terrorism and the destruction of the world economy as the most significant mechanism. For many countries in the modern world, the destruction of the economy is almost synonymous with the death of the state, and certainly a change of government. Moreover, the authorities can bring the people themselves, processed by systemic propaganda. For example, recently the EU has actively begun to fight such channels, albeit belatedly. Over the past 20 years, a huge number of media outlets have appeared in the EU media space that are purposefully engaged in promoting narratives and propaganda aimed against law, order and stability in the EU. And it is economic terror that works “perfectly” in tandem with propaganda. As a result, the population remains, there is no destruction, but you take control of the country or region

[DrBeer]

Terrorism does seem to be on the rise, but it seems more of a political than an economic matter to me. The problem is that the international community if often not unified enough and not determined enough to call out terrorism, decisively condemn it, and ensure punishment of those who use it as a method and those who support such usage. The economic part does somewhat kick in when there are attempts to limit terrorism by working on preventing financing of terrorism, and in some cases (as with Russia), it can have significant global economic impact. Of course, terrorism also has a very negative local impact, as investors don't normally want to put their money into states that endorse terrorism.

I wrote about this. But with the opposite option
From the "political" method, terrorism came to economic terrorism to increase political pressure. For example, the economic gas terror against the EU, in theory, should have caused enormous social tension and the population against the current government. Changing a government “disloyal to the Kremlin” was the goal. But political methods did not work, Germany would not forgive open terrorism, and economic is a more flexible option for influence, especially since at any moment you can do better than before and get “popular support.”
You know, there is such a principle: “if someone asks you to make their conditions better, first make it much worse, and then return it to how it was - and they will thank you!”

[DrBeer]

Fighting against corruption is the most difficult thing for the government to do to control it. How can corrupt officials be controlled if the President of the country himself is corrupt? But if the highest leader of the country is not corrupt and the majority under him is corrupt, this is a serious problem or challenge for that leader to subdue the corrupt little by little.

But even if it can't be removed or swept away, for sure it will be reduced and removed from the government. That has already happened in the country I belong to; the corrupt have really decreased. That's why, until the end of his term, there are still corrupt officials left. It is as difficult to defeat the enemy if the enemy is the government itself.

I generally consider corruption to be one of the greatest evils of our world. And here the fight must be fought by all possible methods - from the legislative framework, which is quite tough, to "technical solutions" such as CBDC, which allows you to control virtually all flows of money. Control and monitoring of incomes/expenses, strict punishments (fines), exceeding the level of illegally obtained profit by orders of magnitude, prevention through payment of information about corruption schemes (for example, 10% of the fine mentioned above).... The point is that a person, or a citizen, if he does not understand that stealing is a crime, should simply be afraid of punishment. It does not sound very nice, but there are no other methods of struggle. Unfortunately, it is impossible to fight evil with "hugs"

[Biznesmen]

The Institute of Economics and Peace publishes the Global Terrorism Index 2023. It says that, for the fourth year in a row, Afghanistan is the country most affected by terrorism. South Asia has the lowest GTI score. The financial impact of terrorism is lost lifetime wages, medical treatment expenditures, property damage caused by terrorist attacks, etc. Economic factors are also leading to the spread of terrorism, such as poverty, unemployment, and inequality. Terrorism in Somalia, which is one of the poorest countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Direct socialization, e-commerce, exploitation of online payment tools, and charitable organizations are the sources of terror financing.

[bittraffic]

Fighting against corruption is the most difficult thing for the government to do to control it. How can corrupt officials be controlled if the President of the country himself is corrupt? But if the highest leader of the country is not corrupt and the majority under him is corrupt, this is a serious problem or challenge for that leader to subdue the corrupt little by little.

But even if it can't be removed or swept away, for sure it will be reduced and removed from the government. That has already happened in the country I belong to; the corrupt have really decreased. That's why, until the end of his term, there are still corrupt officials left. It is as difficult to defeat the enemy if the enemy is the government itself.

I generally consider corruption to be one of the greatest evils of our world. And here the fight must be fought by all possible methods - from the legislative framework, which is quite tough, to "technical solutions" such as CBDC, which allows you to control virtually all flows of money. Control and monitoring of incomes/expenses, strict punishments (fines), exceeding the level of illegally obtained profit by orders of magnitude, prevention through payment of information about corruption schemes (for example, 10% of the fine mentioned above).... The point is that a person, or a citizen, if he does not understand that stealing is a crime, should simply be afraid of punishment. It does not sound very nice, but there are no other methods of struggle. Unfortunately, it is impossible to fight evil with "hugs"

It doesn't end for the government also allows it, even in the small city a crime gang is being used by the intelligence department to track who are corrupt officials and small time criminals. The government only pins them down when favorable or there is a reason.

Hamas for example is not considered terrorist in Gaza but a political party. Same with breakaway region in my country the local crime group here are called Freedom Fighters but if this crime group disturbs a big operation that involves corrupt officials, they will be declared as terrorist too. They're just narrative.

[topbitcoin]

In many cases carried out by terrorists, they often target houses of worship and religious events. So this creates fear among religious people and disrupts the social system. However, this would be different if the terrorist's goal was not only to disrupt social life but also to try to disrupt economic activities as a form of resistance and disobedience to his country. As happened in 2022, where a group of terrorists targeted an oil refinery in Saudi Arabia as an act of sabotage and terrorism. As we know, this oil refinery is one of the largest oil refineries in the world, so this action can not only affect national economic activity, but global trade and economic activity can also be disrupted.
So it can be ascertained that this terrorist activity greatly affects the economy, both national and global, because it can cause economic activity to decline and be hampered

[3kpk3]

Modern terrorists these days aren't really dumb like the old ones who used to simply kill themselves like idiots in the name of their gods. They are smartly taking advantage of certain situations for their own ulterior motives.

They aren't capable of messing up the global economy and they aren't interested in doing that either since they stand to gain more from a booming global economy.

[DrBeer]

Modern terrorists these days aren't really dumb like the old ones who used to simply kill themselves like idiots in the name of their gods. They are smartly taking advantage of certain situations for their own ulterior motives.
They aren't capable of messing up the global economy and they aren't interested in doing that either since they stand to gain more from a booming global economy.

Religious manipulation is one of the tools of terrorism. Having a flock of tens of millions, who are "fed" with fairy-tale promises, but do not give people knowledge, quality life - this is a perfect environment for the development of man-hatred, hatred of development, knowledge, progress.... I have already said - none of the preachers put on the belt of "shahid" and will not go to "72 beautiful gurias". They receive huge sums of money for moral and psychological training of "raw material for terror", live in beautiful houses, drive expensive cars, love luxury and quite earthly "joys". And the poor, uneducated, deprived of prospects and future, the masses, with inflamed morbid fantasies - will destroy neighboring countries, peoples, destroy cities... at their one word. And they will think that these are "righteous deeds"....

[KingsDen]

Modern terrorists these days aren't really dumb like the old ones who used to simply kill themselves like idiots in the name of their gods. They are smartly taking advantage of certain situations for their own ulterior motives.

They aren't capable of messing up the global economy and they aren't interested in doing that either since they stand to gain more from a booming global economy.

I don't know where you have the idea of modern terrorists who aren't dumb and who possibly saves the people and economy against the wishes of their masters. Maybe you watch this in the movies, but in reality this is nothing close to reality.
The terrorists have a global goals and in the quest to achieving these global goals, the terrorists form international synergy against the government of different countries they attack.
Meanwhile, in some certain situations it has been proven that government has hands in so many terrorism that is happening across the globe.

This is where I respect the saying of the Nigerian former head of State Late Gen Sani Abacha. He said "Any terrorism that lasts more than 24hrs, the government has a hand in it"
Government uses terrorism to destabilise another government by instigating them against the people.

[Ben Barubal]

  We know that when it comes to terrorism, it is not good because all countries consider it an enemy of the state. And when it gets into a country that has a law that must be followed, usually no terrorists follow it.

  And of course, when there are these types of people, it creates or causes chaos in the government areas, which, when terrorism takes a step, causes a bad effect on the economy of each country. The ones who will be affected the most are the innocent people who have nothing to do with what these terrorists are fighting against the government where they are.

[DrBeer]

The Institute of Economics and Peace publishes the Global Terrorism Index 2023. It says that, for the fourth year in a row, Afghanistan is the country most affected by terrorism. South Asia has the lowest GTI score. The financial impact of terrorism is lost lifetime wages, medical treatment expenditures, property damage caused by terrorist attacks, etc. Economic factors are also leading to the spread of terrorism, such as poverty, unemployment, and inequality. Terrorism in Somalia, which is one of the poorest countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Direct socialization, e-commerce, exploitation of online payment tools, and charitable organizations are the sources of terror financing.

Very interesting information. I recommend to pay attention to one interesting nuance - "South Asia has the lowest GTI score" ! Question - why ? The answer lies in the peculiarities of the politics of the region. I recommend to read it, the answer will become very clear and understandable.

[DrBeer]

It doesn't end for the government also allows it, even in the small city a crime gang is being used by the intelligence department to track who are corrupt officials and small time criminals. The government only pins them down when favorable or there is a reason.

Hamas for example is not considered terrorist in Gaza but a political party. Same with breakaway region in my country the local crime group here are called Freedom Fighters but if this crime group disturbs a big operation that involves corrupt officials, they will be declared as terrorist too. They're just narrative.

I can agree with you that there is frequent manipulation when "undesirable" people are labeled as terrorists. The fact is that this "method of life" has a very clear definition, and it describes a set of crimes, both against the country as a whole, and against the population of their own or foreign countries. I recommend studying the classical description of what terrorism is, and it will become clear to you why criminals are called
criminals, and adequate people will never be called such a "title".