Why crime is coterminous with terror

Of the many discussions over crime-terror, those that focus upon the basics of the two are fewer. This is simply because their actors & methods seem different. In both their direct & indirect versions of direct & indirect violence.

The other reason simply occurs from a fatigue: human complicity, ignorance & the propensity of the political elites in many states to see their roles as similar to those of popular celebrities, that occur through popular cinema & the entertainment industries.

Yet the differences between the two could not be more stark. Or their mandates & areas under which they fall - thus of jurisdictions, juridical responsibilities & plain functional obligations. Those actually should put political elites under severe juridical boundaries that also necessarily remain unforgiving: in both scrutiny & penal punishments. Rather than the obverse of perceptions & realities of political elites/actors holding areas of state jurisdictions under them - when they occupy public offices that are constitutional.

Or even when outside such offices - participate in activities that make their seeking of such offices a fact. Or the consequences of such seekings in privileges - as political persons.

Yet the fact remains that the 'political' in many backward states are the crime-terror actors! This they acquire & practice as extra-constitutional actors running their own personal fiefdom, or mafiosi that elections turn into visible 'political' forces. India is a plain little argot in that if one is too generous with crime & far too lenient with meanings.

One can imagine what overtly non-democratic states are like - but with a shudder. 

Now the functional attributes of the state is in ensuring an environment of secure sensibilities of democratic freedoms. Crime & terror its obverse. The reason why police forms the antonym of crime; a policing person the antonym of the criminal & the terrorist!

"Terrorism is systematic in that it pursues a sustained policy of violent force to create and prolong terror and anxiety amongst the society or group it targets."

"The key element to terrorism, as its etymology suggests, is psychological. It seeks to achieve a violation of the sense of security in dramatic fashion by creating a fear psychosis amongst the common mass."

Now if we look at the above two aspects, and recognize that they refer to societies not yet terrorized, we immediately can identify crime & criminals here as coterminous with terror. In their functional objectives via a reverse socialization of their target populace/people. 

To effect a capitulation to their coercive demands amidst the threat of physical violence and/or disruption of the ordinary sense of security & well-being the state guarantees to every resident, upon its territory.

So it becomes easier to understand why many states would be reluctant - especially the flailing, hollow & failed states, with the blurring of functional as well as the normative boundaries we just noted - to look at crime & terror as siamese twins that also need similar environments to hunt!

Overtly democratic argot states like India, in South Asia, present the privatization of the state & societies by crime-terror by the large - but where the functional synonymity of the two antonyms are best effected by its 'political' class! As its almost unique achievement of the Indian state that came into existence in August 15, 1947, CE.

Given that both the modern, democratic state & modern politics are modern terms & realities - the pre-modern & functionally pre-civil (as well as pre-social cognitive realities of its populace) actually mark the worst amongst them to represent the 'political'.  Thus effectively sabotaging both practice & discussions of the state and politics within contemporary times. Unfortunately, and in clear consequences of those, the topic of crime & terror.

States & societies like India may only be referred to by the reified notions of both state & politics in civil realms, and not by their functional & real attributes in terms of cognition, compliance, or even culture. 

Setting aside such argots of the modern, democratic state - the discussions upon their produce in human resources etc - actually help other states better secure themselves - given that the globalization process and the internet affords one with newer means of both crime & terror!

If the recent arguments & discussions over the threat of the Turkish state to unleash refugees inside the EU is any indication & if true - indicates the weaponization of terms & realities of humanitarian crises (whatever be the merits of the complex swamps that ordered for the EU-Turkish deal upon refugees/migrants). What we refer to here is the facile weaponization of newer agencies & factors that is equally open to crime-terror actors, including many other means. In argot democratic but fabulously backward states like India? Well...

Given the basic objectives of both crime & terror to force people to live under conditions of fear and anxiety - no matter what means (direct violence/threats of violence or other indirect violence to disrupt the sense of wellbeing & security), both crime/criminals & terror/terrorists remain the banal curses occupying the same area, within their opposed natures to human civilization & modern structures like the democratic state. One reason why the Islamic crime-terror are spoken of more often than other fringe groups and which many, even within the Islamic crime-terror actors fail to recognize. Or feel injured about!

Or concerns of many within the EU over 'millionarized refugizations' some rue  about & is seen as the emergence of a hardening EU stand, or of some of its populace. Despite with most recent crime-terror actors within the EU actually occuring as EU residents!