Rhetoric Techniques of Labeling of Environmentalists as "Terrorists": the Case of the Earth Liberation Front in the United States of America, 1996 – 2006

Abstract

This thesis analyzes the rhetoric techniques of terrorism labeling with the focus on the Earth Liberation Front in the USA, 1996-2006. Narratives of terrorism have found extreme popularity in various dimensions of social sciences. The increase in application of ‘terrorism’ labels towards non-killing environmental movements has notably risen since 2001. The Earth Liberation Front is considered to be of particular concern of the US authorities, when speaking of eco-terrorism. In 2001 the FBI has classified ELF at the top domestic terrorism threat; whereas the movement speaks in defense of all forms of lives, and there have never been any victims in consequence of their actions. The study aims to investigate how it is possible to label a non-killing environmental group as ‘terrorists’ in the US mainstream discourse. Taking into account the absence of the universally accepted definition of terrorism, I also reflect upon the ambiguity of its concept per se. To research the techniques, applied by the US authorities and mainstream media, while drawing a parallel between terrorism acts and actions of economic sabotage, I use qualitative method of discourse analysis. The research is done, relying on the analysis of the sources, presenting both perspectives: the authorities and mainstream media on the one hand, and the environmentalists on the other hand. The main findings of the research show that although both the US authorities and the Earth Liberation Front refer to the concept of terrorism, in the mainstream discourse ELF is classified as a domestic terrorist threat with an emphasis on the violent nature of their acts. However, according to the official ELF position, terror tactics are considered unacceptable; and there is a distinction between acts of economic sabotage, directed against property, and terrorism, possessing a threat against human beings. However, in the US mainstream discourse the line between these concepts are blurred, by mixing the notions and emphasizing the potential danger of the environmentalists’ tactics.