Depends on the collective, but yes, generally.

....uhhh I think youre wrong https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4ED6opUDeg8&pp=ygUVYmFkZW1wYW5hZGEgdGVycm9yaXN00gcJCRMMAYcqIYzv

Collective punishment is actually NOT terrorist shit. The first people classified as 'terrorosts' tended to ONLY target specific targets because they wanted to spur on massive political changes by their harm or by the harm others received. Even in thhe past most 'terrorism' was done by poor, practically invisible people who couldnt gett into the political system to make change so hhad no choice but to resort to violence. The Haitians and the Polish soldiers that freed themselves would DEFINITELY had been classified as terrorists had the Haitian Revolution happened today or even in the 1900s wjen the word 'terrorism' was first created. The African Slaves, Germanics(the battle of Teutonberg Forest ring any bells?), Arabs , aand Huns who rose up against their Roman and european subjugators would ALSO be calledd terrorists today , no?

Apolitical mass murderes rarely ever pick specific targets and theyre actually a phenomena that occurs more nowadays than they did in the past based on only the records we have kept (they may have been more common in the past we just dont know cause we didnt keep the best record of apolitical mass murderers. Mass murder wss more common in the past. , we all know that , but mass murderr in the past was almost always politically or materially motivated - it tended to be because a group or person wanted change for more independence or wanted easier access to resources that greedy fatfucks were stealing from them.)

but being a terrorist isnt the the best thing but it also isnt thr worst thing in the world as it has been painted to be by bourgeoisie mmedia. The IRA were terrorists.... they have mostly completed their main goals. The Taliban were terrorists.... they have mostly completed their main goals. Heck, the NVA and VietMinh were classified as terrorists.... We saw how THAT situatiin ended , huh?