“There’s a simple reason that since the 1980s the world has witnessed thousands of suicide bombings: It’s the most efficient form of violence at close range. The spread of this seemingly unstoppable technique has made political violence much more potent by enlisting an unlikely cadre of perpetrators—the middle class.”

Of course, this isn’t the first to accuse the middle class of violence. Many a revolution has been credited to them. The article isn’t really fantastic, either. For something called “Foreign Policy” I expected a lot better.

“Clandestine, confrontation-avoiding violence such as suicide bombing is a fourth pathway around confrontational tension. It succeeds only because the attacker is good at pretending that he or she is not threatening at all. People accustomed to the typical macho forms of violence are not good at this; gang members would make lousy suicide bombers. But mild-mannered middle-class people are ideal for it. Since they are not confrontational by nature, they do not have to control a blustering or threatening demeanor that would warn their victims.” Seriously? Where are we getting these ideas from?  “Self-directed introverts, they do not need to hear cheering as they stalk their prey.” Now, on the Discovery Channel, a very special show on the hunting habits of the middlus classus. “Middle-class culture is especially accommodative, adept at maintaining a smooth surface of conventionality. Whatever our private feelings, we learn not to express them on the job, in social situations, or in public. This is good training for carrying a bomb under one’s clothing until the target is so close that massive damage is certain.” I thought it made people sexually repressed, but that’s just me.

The whole, “it’s always that quiet kid that no one notices in the corner that finally snaps!” point is cute, but really it could have been done better. It’s a weak argument. Plus, their idea of the “middle class” confuses me. “I suggest it is because suicide bombing is the easiest form of violence for conventional middle-class people to carry out, if they decide to commit violence at all.” So what is it that finally makes the “middle class” snap? Is it the same catalyst in every single case? Would an Australian middle-class man in 1950 snap for the same reason as an Afghani middle class woman in 1970? They don’t define the parameters.  They just suppose that this phrase is so descriptive on its own. This chameleon “middle class” is perpetuating the violence. Any statistics? Any proof?

Oh gosh, should we watch the (shrinking) middle class closely now?

There. I said it.

Just like with Godwin’s Law, how every conversation eventually brings up Nazis, and with Stanley Milgram’s “small world experiment”, how everyone is generally connected to anyone else by a few small degrees of separation…

Now, now I coin the phrase, after yours truly, Wolfe’s Law: Everything leads to Terrorism in one way or another.

The below example is only one of many. See how many you can come up with!

Spotting Links to Terrorism, Inc.

“As companies expand their global reach, they risk smudging their reputations by linking up with less-than-savory regimes. Even firms with good reputations reach into dark corners.

Take Royal Dutch/Shell. Although highly regarded for its environmental and human rights stances, the oil giant is drilling in Iran. Or consider Swedish carmaker Volvo. Despite its nice-guy image, it has sold trucks to Iraq.

Until Sept. 11, no group formally screened publicly traded companies for their links to terrorism or the spread of weapons of mass destruction. But as the United States has focused on terrorism, so some groups have begun to look at companies linked to it, even peripherally.

Earlier this month, a socially responsible investors group announced it had compiled a list of nearly 300 such firms. The group, the Investor Responsibility Research Center (IRRC), along with the Conflict Securities Advisory Group (CSAG), prefers to sell its list to subscribers (at $12,500 a year) rather than make it public. Nevertheless, the statistics it has released make interesting reading.

For example, of the 260 or so firms linked to countries supporting terrorism and developing weapons of mass destruction, a third are European. More than a quarter come from Asia. Only 10 percent are American.”