Copyright ©2008, Journal of World-Systems Research, Volume XIV, Number 2, Pages 91-118 ISSN 1076-156X DEFINING AND THEORIZING TERRORISM: A GLOBAL ACTOR-CENTERED APPROACH Omar Lizardo Department of Sociology University of Notre Dame olizardo@nd.edu ABSTRACT Arriving at a consensual definition of the phenomenon of terrorism has been a particularly difficult undertaking. Some definitions are either too specific or too vague, concentrating on some essential “terrorist” aspect of the actions, strategies, or types of non-state organizations that engage in terrorism. In this paper I draw on global approaches from international relations and world systems theories to propose a definition of terrorism that skirts these issues by concentrating on terrorist actors rather than terrorist behavior. I argue that this approach has several advantages, including the dissolution of several empirical and analytical problems produced by more essentialist definitions, and the location of terrorism within a two dimensional continuum of collective-violence phenomena in the international system which discloses important theoretical insights. I proceed to examine the characteristics of terrorism by comparing it with other forms of violence in the international system. I propose that terrorism may be part of the cycles and trends of unrest in the world system, responding to the same broad families of global dynamics as other forms of system-level conflict. INTRODUCTION It is no secret that arriving at a consensual definition of terrorism is a difficult task. Some might say that constructing a characterization of terrorism that would be satisfactory for everyone is a downright impossible undertaking. It is much easier to point out the flaws in extant conceptions and usages of the term than to come up with a definition that would be free of those same faults, while being comprehensive enough to be both acceptable to most lay observers and useful for the conduct of academic research on the subject. Taking a birds-eye view of the field, it is clear what is wrong with current characterizations of terrorism: they are either too specific or too vague, they concentrate on particular (and theoretically arbitrary) aspects of the phenomenon while de- emphasizing others, or are too normatively oriented, mixing up descriptive and prescriptive terminology. Using inconsistent definitions of the term is not helpful for a variety of reasons (see Gibbs 1989:329; Goodwin 2006:2027-2028). First, semantic vagueness has served to make it