ABSTRACT
Generalism accuses scepticism of grossly exaggerating the practical obstacles that stand in the way of testing general theories of terrorism. For example, hypotheses about what causes the turn to political violence can be evaluated by debriefing known terrorists and studying trial testimonies and pre-trial interrogations. Arguments between proponents of rival answers to Marc Sageman’s question are arguments between different general theories of terrorism. The key theses of the politico-rational approaches are that terrorism is fundamentally ‘a mode of political action’ and in many cases a collectively rational strategic choice that is the result of ‘logical processes that can be discovered and explained’. Politico-rational approaches are also opposed to the notion that terrorists are irrational. Counterterrorism programmes should focus on countering terrorism rather than cognitive radicalisation. Terrorists are complex particulars and, apart from the difficulty of knowing which interactions with other people have impacted on them, there is also the difficulty of knowing how such interactions have impacted on them.
