" ▁in ▁any ▁setting ▁is ▁always ▁a ▁subject ive ▁and ▁political ▁matter . ▁Thus , ▁we ▁suggest ▁that ▁any ▁discussion ▁of ▁extrem ism ▁be ▁mind ful ▁of ▁the ▁following : ▁Typ ically , ▁the ▁same ▁extrem ist ▁act ▁will ▁be ▁viewed ▁by ▁some ▁as ▁just ▁and ▁moral ▁( such ▁as ▁pro - social ▁" fre edom ▁fighting "), ▁and ▁by ▁others ▁as ▁un just ▁and ▁imm oral ▁( ant iso cial ▁" ter ror ism ") ▁depending ▁on ▁the ▁observer ' s ▁values , ▁politics , ▁moral ▁scope , ▁and ▁the ▁nature ▁of ▁their ▁relationship ▁with ▁the ▁actor . ▁In ▁addition , ▁one ' s ▁sense ▁of ▁the ▁moral ▁or ▁imm oral ▁nature ▁of ▁a ▁given ▁act ▁of ▁extrem ism ▁( such ▁as ▁Nelson ▁Mand ela ' s ▁use ▁of ▁guer illa ▁war ▁tact ics ▁against ▁the ▁South ▁African ▁Government ) ▁may ▁change ▁as ▁conditions ▁( le ad ership , ▁world ▁opinion , ▁cr ises , ▁historical ▁accounts , ▁etc .) ▁change . ▁Thus , ▁the ▁current ▁and ▁historical ▁context ▁of ▁extrem ist ▁acts ▁shapes ▁our ▁view ▁of ▁them . ▁Power ▁differences ▁also ▁matter ▁when ▁defining ▁extrem ism . ▁When ▁in ▁conflict , ▁the ▁activities ▁of ▁members ▁of ▁low ▁power ▁groups ▁tend ▁to ▁be ▁viewed ▁as ▁more ▁extreme ▁than ▁similar ▁activities ▁committed ▁by ▁members ▁of ▁groups ▁advoc ating ▁the ▁status ▁qu o . ▁▁ ▁In ▁addition , ▁extreme ▁acts ▁are ▁more ▁likely ▁to ▁be ▁employed ▁by ▁marg inal ized ▁people ▁and ▁groups ▁who ▁view ▁more ▁norm ative ▁forms ▁of ▁conflict ▁eng agement ▁as