Political terrorism and the size of government: A positive institutional analysis of violent political activity
Political terrorism has been described as violent political behavior primarily designed to generate fear in the community, or a substantial part of it, for political purposes.' Political terrorism is distinguished from revolution in that the immediate objective of terrorist acts is intimidation rather than the overthrow of the existing government. Terrorism is a form of political extortion. Positive theories of crime 2 and extortion 3 assume that individuals will act to maximize some objective function subject to existing social or legal constraints. However, there is no parallel to these positive approaches aimed directly at the subject of political terrorism. Existing literature (hereafter referred to collectively as traditional literature) is dominated by the writings of psychologists, sociologists, and historians. Within these works, political purposes are typically defined as ideological in nature. As a result, political terrorists are assumed to be ideological zealots, willing to kill and be killed in order to further 'the cause'. Within this context positive analysis becomes difficult. Few analysts can rationalize such extreme behavior. As a result, traditional studies are forced to search for typically unobservable psychological and socio-economic characteristics as explanations for violent behavior. Frequently cited causes of political terrorism are lack of self-esteem (Kaplan, 1978: 245), emancipation afforded women (Dobson and Payne, 1979: 51), economic and political alienation and relative depravation (Bassouini, 1975; Gurr, 1969 and 1970; Dollard et al., 1939; and Wilkinson, 1977). Terrorists are characterized as irrational (Wilkinson, 1977: 49) or insane (National Advisory Committee..., p. 20). The dominant theme in the existing literature is a call for expansion of
What causes terrorism?
We provide an overview of empirical evidence on the determinants of terrorism, in particular focusing on the origins and targets of transnational terrorism. We also assemble several broad theoretical families that relate terrorism to, e.g., economic, political and institutional and demographic factors. We provide a critical discussion of the existing empirical evidence and refer to a number of areas of future research before describing some modest policy implications.
The administration of the courts
Section 28 of Article VI of the State Constitution provides that the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals is the Chief Judge of the State and its chief judicial officer. The Chief Judge appoints a Chief Administrator of the Courts (or Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts if the appointee is a judge) with the advice and consent of the Administrative Board of the Courts. The Administrative Board consists of the Chief Judge as chair and the Presiding Justices of the four Appellate Divisions of the Supreme Court. The Chief Judge establishes statewide administrative standards and policies after consultation with the Administrative Board and approval by the Court of Appeals.