V for Vendetta

He's a fictional character.....

Freedom Fighter. If I remember correctly, he made sure that no civilians were hurt during his demonstrations and told everyone about his final plan a year in advance.

Though, you could make a case for either.

If you can't chose both, then the person asking the question is forcing unnecessary myopia. Terrorism isn't just defined as killing civilians; it also includes destruction of property. The main characteristic that makes it "terrorism" is the intent to coerce people or governments. But since the terrorism is armed rebellion against an oppressive government, he was also a freedom fighter.

I assume this is sort of class report. I would probably just refuse to accept that "both" should not be an option. Its been quite awhile since I saw the movie, but doesn't your being forced to pick one or the other disregard the meaning of the movie? Could it be that the point of the class exercise is to get you to pick both even when you're not told to?

If you really want to pick one, maybe just pick whatever you feel the majority of the people in the movie would have considered him.

Why does this sound like a homework assignment?

Perhaps we need a "do my homework for me" forum.

To some the IRA were freedom fighters - to many more, they were terrorists.

I think the difference is who they are fighting against. If someone blows up the Magic Kingdom because King Mickey isn't giving away enough free ice cream, that's terrorism. Obviously, things aren't quite as clear cut as that, but in V for Vendetta it is that clear. The people V fights are evil people, and it's hard to show a point of view that makes them look like good people.

Maybe they're trying to create order in the anarchy, which is in and of itself honorable and good, but they're only doing it for their own benefit. Mix in some torture and genetic experimentation and you've got yourself an evil regime waiting to be destroyed: BY A FREEDOM FIGHTER!

That's a premonition if I ever saw one!

I have some homework I would like to bring to the group. I take Microeconomics too Moe, care to exchange notes? :)

Alan Moore, the author of the comic, has said "...the central question is, is this guy right? Or is he mad? What do you, the reader, think about this? Which struck me as a properly anarchist solution. I didn't want to tell people what to think, I just wanted to tell people to think, and consider some of these admittedly extreme little elements, which nevertheless do recur fairly regularly throughout human history."

So, according to the author, it is a 'to each his own' type of situation. The Wikipedia page for the story has some interesting stuff too.

And when I said to read the book, I meant the comic, not the novelization of the movie.

Was Timothy McVeigh a terrorist or a freedom fighter?

That's a very slippery slope you're travelling down there, my friend. Not sure if you're trying to make a point, or what, but however you meant it to come off, you may not want to pursue it any further. What happened with that bombing was nothing but a tragedy.

Was Timothy McVeigh a terrorist or a freedom fighter?
U know, I don't even know what he was for. Fighting freedom for whom? where are his followers? Had really no great plan except for making a point. From just a neutral point of view, of someone (McVeigh) who wanted to change something? he sure had no great plan, no smart way of going about it. Left, really, no lasting legacy of what he was for.

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...

Where did that quote originate? I've heard it dozens of times, but I've never been able to find the person who said it originally.

It most definitely didn't originate from a Bond flick ;)