America is a Nation of Terror

Terrorism can be defined as: Wait, sorry, no it’s not. It’s uhh… Oh wait, maybe actually it’s- Oh wait. No, actually, it’s- Huh. Turns out there are a lot of different definitions of terrorism. In fact, terrorism expert Walter Laqueur counted over 100 different definitions in his research and he concluded that: What’s that about? “One way of trying to… undermine independent thoughts and the… creative approaches to the world is to simply destroy the way of talking about things.” “So the words literally almost have no meaning.” Thanks, Noam Chomsky. So, it turns out that terrorism is one of these words that means whatever we want it to mean whenever we say it. Within the narrow discourse of the United States of American political spectrum, it means very specifically: In other words, America is never going to label anything as terrorism if it’s reminiscent of the violence that’s regularly perpetrated by the American state and the white male class that drives it. You see, any time an act of violence occurs, our society automatically runs it through a sort of a filter and if it hits too close to home for white America, it will not be labeled as terrorism. Don’t believe me? Let’s look at some examples. First, to calibrate, we’ll start with an easy one. Something that’s clearly an act of terrorism: So these guys were brown-skinned muslims, they murdered a lot of white people, and they had a very clear anti-U.S. political statement. Definitely terrorism. Okay, let’s look at another politically motivated terrorist: Ted Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber. Even though he’s white, he did kill a lot of white people and he clearly opposed the United States government. So he is defined as a terrorist. Now let’s take a look at the Fort Hood mass shooting. In 2009, American army officer Nidal Hasan went on a shooting spree. He killed 13 people and wounded 30 others. Although he had developed extremist islamic views, he left no clear manifesto and no statement of political intent. So even though he left no clear manifesto behind, he’s still labeled as a terrorist because he’s a brown muslim, and he killed a lot of white people. Here’s another shooter: Dylann Roof. In 2015, he entered a church in my hometown of Charleston, South Carolina and killed 9 people in cold blood. He left behind a lengthy and clearly defined political manifesto explaining that his attack was a political act in support of white nationalism. Like Ted Kaczynski, Roof was white; Like Ted Kaczynski, Roof had a very clear political motive and like Ted Kaczynski, Roof killed a lot of people. So, why isn’t Dylann Roof considered a terrorist? Because while Ted Kaczynski aligned himself against the United States government and the way our society functions, Dylann Roof’s violence mirrors the violence inherent in America’s cultural and political structures. Dylann Roof committed violence against non-whites in the name of white supremacy. American society was built on violence against non-whites and white supremacy is inherent in our power structures. From slavery to the Civil Rights counter-movement, to rampant police violence, to foreign wars in non-white countries, we as a society have always inflicted violence against people of color. If America were to admit that Dylann Roof’s brand of violence were terrorism, then we’d de facto be admitting that we have been committing acts of terrorism on a massive scale since 1776. Anytime combatants in Iraq and Afghanistan used suicide bombs and IEDs, they are invariably labeled as terrorists. But when American soldiers mass murdered hundreds of civilians in the My Lai massacre in Vietnam or 16 civilians in the Kandahar massacre in Afghanistan or whenever we drop drone strikes on innocent civilians or torture and humiliate prisoners, it’s never called terrorism. But what’s the difference, really? How was a drone strike any less terrifying than an improvised explosive device? It’s certainly politically motivated. After the recent bombings in Austin, we’re once again engaging in massive online flame wars about whether another white mass murderer should be labeled as a terrorist or not. The mainstream media says the jury is still out because we don’t know if the bombings were politically motivated or not. Now, Condit did have a blog in which he espoused far-right political views, but those don’t count, apparently because they weren’t clearly linked to the bombings and he never made a clear political statement. Never mind that Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, also never made a clear political statement and his extreme views were never clearly linked to the shooting. Yes, Hasan did allegedly shout Allah Akbar while he was carrying out his shooting, but he didn’t leave behind any kind of clear political manifesto. He just never clearly linked the shooting to any kind of political motivation. The key difference then, between Nidal Hasan and Mark Anthony Condit is that Hassan was a brown man who happened to have extremist muslim views while Condit was a white man who happened have extremist reactionary views. And America is a white, reactionary society. The police say that Condit targeted a specific woman, so it can’t be considered terrorism. Well, of course violence against a woman can’t be labeled as terrorism, even if he was trying to terrorize her with his multiple bombings because white male society in America is in part defined by the violence we sustain against women. If we were to admit that using acts of violence to destroy and manipulate women constituted terrorism then, again, we’d de facto be pleading guilty to terrorism ourselves. So what we’re left with ultimately in America is an incredibly convoluted definition of terrorism in mainstream society. Terrorism is an act of violence with clear political motivation, unless it’s carried out by U.S. soldiers, because the United States can’t possibly commit acts of terrorism. Terrorism can be defined as an act of violence with a very vague and undefined political motivation, as long as it’s carried out by a non-white person. It is possible for white people to commit acts of terrorism, as long as they’re very clearly opposed to the United States government and United States social structures. Hey, you know what? Screw that. The bald, naked, ugly truth of the matter is that the United States of America is a nation of terrorism. Black men in America live in constant terror of being murdered by the police or wrongly incarcerated by our criminal justice system; brown people throughout the Middle East live in constant terror of being obliterated by drone strikes or becoming the next targets of American imperialist invasion; the LGBTQ community lives in constant terror of being assaulted and murdered; women live in constant terror of becoming victims of sexual violence; immigrants live in constant terror of having their lives ripped away from them and being incarcerated indefinitely without trial and of course, we all live with that lingering, constant terror of being the next victim of an angry white man with a gun or a bomb, every time we go to school or a movie theater or now, apparently, even when we just go and check our mail. Here’s my definition of terrorism. It’s simple: By that definition, it’s irrefutable: the United States of America is a terrorist nation, we have to call it what it is, we have to confront it directly. And the only way to put a stop to the terror is to overthrow the power structures of capitalism and patriarchy and white supremacy that keep us all living in fear. I’m Emerican Johnson, this is Non-Compete. Thank you so much for watching. Back to you, Noam Chomsky. “First of all, when we use the term ‘terror’ we have to recognize that, like most terms of political discourse, has two meanings.” “There’s a literal meaning, and there’s the doctrinal meaning.” “Now, in the literal meaning, ‘terror’ is what’s described in U.S. code of laws: It’s the threat or use of violence to intimidate typically against civilians, to intimidate populations for political, ideological and other ends.” “Well, nobody can use that definition.” “Because if you use that definition, it follows instantly that the United States is a leading terror state, that Britain’s another leading terrorist state and so on.” “So, the literal definition, the one that’s in the US code of laws, is unusable.” If you enjoyed this video, I hope you will give it a subscribe and a thumbs up. If you think that I am a snowflake, then give it a thumbs down. You can check out my blog at I put articles up just about every week, and I have a new video every Friday, so I’ll see you next week.

29 thoughts on “America is a Nation of Terror

  1. What baffles me is when the ostensible bad guys in the media narrative like the FARC for the last half century in Colombia, or militants in Palestine, or Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, or ISIS, or whoever end up attacking military targets like the US Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1982? or 3?, or Israeli occupation troops, or whoever, that action still gets labeled "terrorism". I remember when 9/11 happened, the conventional definitions of the word "terrorism" usually included the caveat that the violence had to be directed towards civilians in order to count as terrorism, but now, almost two decades later, the term has de-facto been redefined as such: (I hope this definition suffices. I tried to make it the most comprehensive that I could given how our media culture uses the term.)

    Terrorism: defined as any violence at all that is ever committed against the US military or civilians, people or governments we are allied with, or are sufficiently like us, whether lethal violence or merely "violence against property" or advocating for either of these (in word, in thought (like thoughtcrime) or in mere appearance of either). Notable exception: the US, its allies, or anyone "we" define as the "good guys" cannot ever engage in "terrorism" or be defined as a "terrorist". Such language is hyperbolic by definition, and the person using language in such a heretical way should automatically be presumed to be a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer.

  2. Great video once again, pointing out the pro white bias in terrorist shooting in America, its time people critical think about what people are terrorists and how to deal with the problem.

  3. I would encourage you to please have a more nuanced pov. As a first generation poc male that is the son of Mexican immigrants i find your point of view exhausting. Is there racism in the US yes, does violence against minorities and women define the US? absolutely not. Blanket statements like the ones made in this video is the reason why Republicans control the House, Senate, and Presidency. I am a man of color a liberal democrat and a son of immigrants, english is my second language but this type of anti capitalist, white people = bad white men = bad pov is exhausting and simply wrong. You are just making it harder for us on the left to get any traction with your ludicrous positions. Comrade? lol you are kidding right?

  4. You really made me see this in another way this is so true ! Your quality of videos is superb! great edits and clips 🙌 !

  5. Seriously? Putting capitalism and terrorism in the same bag?? There are plenty of countries with capitalism where people don't live in constant fear.

  6. Man, even if the US did admit to some parallels, they people would probably be too ignorant, or care.

  7. plain and simple…because it really is just that. When Bush Jr. was talking about the "War on Terror", I knew he was lying becasue the KKK and other similar groups got a pass–and still do. We've got to wake up. Just because someone can pick the flavor of the kool-aid they drink doesn't mean they've transcended anything. address the cognitive dissonance instead of just sweetening it. thanks for the "what should be unnecessary–but here we are" video.

  8. In school we learned that terrorism is politically motivated violence against interchangeable civilian targets. So the important thing is that the tragets have little to do with the goal and you could have attacked any other civilian.

  9. I agree with your point on how it's dumb we don't pay attention to clear acts of terrorism by the U.S. Military. I want to ask you, as I've heard you talk about vietnam before, do you believe that the viet cong also committed acts of terrorism as well?

  10. I can't help but cry when reading about U.S. war crimes. I can't imagine the suffering the third world is going through.

  11. Why does this video not have 10 times more views?! I mean 100 times! btw, Chomsky has also said that the US military is the world's largest terrorist organization.

  12. Did you delete my comment? Or was it Youtube? I was just explaining with "colorful" words why as an afghan- yougoslavian immigrant organized communist (living in Italy) raised in the hate of the United States because of its imperialism in my mothercountries I'm so glad that there are – I was sure about that but didn't expect to find them on the internet – some aware Americans and even Israelis, in and below your videos. Not brainwashed and blinded by your nation propaganda, which is the strongest, and by the privilege of being an American. I'm not spreading hate or anything ( I only know class hating). Hope many more in the USA, the West and the "Third world" will join the cause soon… we have a world to win 💞

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *