“Terrorism: the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.” John Brown was a slavery abolitionist who used violence as a method to eradicate slavery. He grew up very religious, and his father taught him to hate slavery because he believed it violated God's commandments. His views ingrained in him at such a young age strengthened and fueled his passion for the cause. However, just because his motives were correct, his methods for achieving these goals were wrong. His raids and rebellions killed and injured numerous people. Although stemming from a good cause, Brown's logic was illegal and broke many laws that deemed him a traitor and murderer. John Brown, the slavery abolitionist, was a terrorist because of his illegal method of pursuing political goals which were exemplified by the events of Bleeding Kansas and his raid on Harpers Ferry. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay John Brown defended his actions by saying they were for a noble and sacred purpose. In his eyes, by using violence, he was doing God's work by punishing wicked men for their sins. Using this methodology, Brown planned to spark a Southern slave revolt by arming slaves and allowing them to rebel against their owners. Although the abolitionist movement was an immensely valuable campaign that needed to be realized and enforced, Brown's practice violated laws that made his actions illegal, regardless of the cause. Brown took the law into his own hands in a violent and destructive manner instead of following the proper legal channels to achieve his goal. It was not John Brown's job/position (to take the law into his own hands) to pursue his political beliefs, and this Brown concept paved the way for others in the future to mistakenly use Brown and his actions as a model and justification. for their use of violence. An example of this was seen recently in the Trump election. In response to Trump's election, a popular Hollywood writer and director, Paul Schrader, communicated his discontent with the outcome of the election and said that people should resort to violence to counter this situation. Schrader specifically stated: “We should fund those who support violent resistance. We should be willing to take up arms. Like old John Brown, I'm willing to fight with my sons.' Schrader's direct reference to John Brown establishes the profound impact he left behind and how his misleading methodology influences people and turns them away from ethical legal action. The decision to use violence to achieve political goals was founded by John Brown and pushes people to follow his example in justifying their immoral and illegal actions. This idea is articulated through a modified version of the Battle Hymn of the Republic. The song states, "John Brown's body lies rotting in the grave, but his soul marches on." His example still inspires modern radicals, who justify violence against the innocent if the cause is "just." Bleeding Kansas Bleeding Kansas refers to the events resulting from the Kansas-Nebraska Act. As a method of compromise relating to slave states, it was established that when two states enter the Union, one must declare itself to be a free state and the other must be a slave state, in order to maintain equal representation of slave and free states. The next two states, Kansas and Nebraska, allowed theirscitizens to vote whether they wanted to be a free or slave state. Nebraska declared itself a slave state, meaning that in order for both to join the Union, Kansas had to declare itself a free state. Kansas' dependence on the vote has created many conflicts among the people. People on both sides of the slavery issue tried to influence the outcome of the vote in Kansas. Supporters of slavery from neighboring Missouri arrived in Kansas in large numbers. These "border ruffians," as they were called, voted illegally and used violence to intimidate their opponents. In the chaos, a pro-slavery group attacked, shot and burned homes, which caused Brown to “take revenge for the attack on Lawrence.” Brown's vote further highlights how he gave himself responsibilities that were not his job to respond to, and instead should have allowed the legal system to punish wrongdoers, instead of becoming a wrongdoer himself. Brown's revenge was that they captured five men who supported slavery and brutally killed them in front of their wives and children. Subsequently, each side followed up with more violent acts of retaliation. During the summer of 1856, more than two hundred people died in what became known as "Bleeding Kansas." Brown became the focus of a great deal of fear and hatred among Southerners. Brown's needless violence was depicted through his revenge against five men who he believed had wronged him and the pro-slavery movement. Overall, in the slavery riots, violence was used by numerous people for their political goals, and John Brown took action against those who used violence for causes that conflicted with his own, contributing to the misuse of violence. city ​​and the federal arsenal, Brown planned to take over the city and the federal arsenal, armory and rifle manufacturing. As news of his actions spread, he expected thousands of slaves and sympathetic whites to join him. Once armed, they would strike south through Virginia, Tennessee, and Alabama, attracting more rebellious slaves and sending groups to spread the insurrection. The overwhelmed planters would be forced to free their slaves, but if opposition proved too strong, Brown planned to establish communities of runaway slaves in the mountains and resist indefinitely. In the ensuing confusion he killed the baggage manager at the train station, a free black man. Contrary to Brown's belief that he was acting for holy purposes and fulfilling God's duties, his use of violence against those who disagreed with him in a sense made him become what he was fighting against. Because of the radicality of Brown's actions, many enemies of slavery considered Brown an embarrassment to their movement. One of Brown's colleagues, Colonel Hugh Forbes, was particularly concerned about his plans. Forbes was a great confidant of John Brown and his plans. As Brown began to further develop and outline his ideas and goals, Forbes began to doubt Brown's plan. He still agreed with the abolitionist's beliefs, but did not think Brown's plan would successfully end slavery. In response to these new doubts, Forbes began leaking information to antislavery parties. The idea that one of Brown's closest associates saw the flaws in Brown's plans and morals strongly promotes that John Brown's actions were ethically wrong and it was illegal to use violence in furtherance of his cause. Furthermore, another of Brown's colleagues who supported the slavery abolitionist movement was William Lloyd Garrison. In reaction to Brown's raid on..