correspondent inference theory, or why terrorists' objectives aren't met

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/07/securitymatters_0712

This is one of the more interesting articles I've read recently. Essentially the argument is that people often attribute certain motives to actions that they observe that are conservative (my term) in nature, e.g., "he's attacking me because he wants to kill me". So insofar as terrorists' objectives are in fact political rather than military, they tend not to be met because (a) political objectives require at least some cooperation, and (b) the people who are affected by terrorist attacks respond to the attacks _as_ attacks, and not as a means to get them to embrace the desired political changes.

I've not expressed this especially well since I'm in a hurry and underslept. Go read the article.

holy crap, I've been soundbitten.

A while back I posted a link to Our Karl Rove.

I happened to stop by and check out the "About" page today, and found that I was one of several people whose snappy quotes were used to sum up the favorable opinions of this blog.

(Heck, he even spelled my name right, although I'm puzzled by the mid-name font/size shift.)

Either this guy doesn't get many links, or I am possessed of a greater measure of quotability than I had previously realized.

Incidentally, it's still a good read, if you're interested in political strategies and message-crafting.