Příčiny a etická ospravedlnění globálního ekoterorismu z perspektivy utilitarismu Petera Singera

This bachelor thesis examines the ethical justification of eco-terrorism from the perspective of Peter Singer’s preference utilitarianism. The aim of the thesis is to assess whether, and under what conditions, an eco-terrorist act can be considered ethically justifiable and what security-legal implications follow from such an assessment. The theoretical part defines the main ethical approaches, explains the choice of Singer’s preference utilitarianism, and places eco-terrorism within the context of environmental and international security. The empirical part is based on a qualitative case study of the 2005 Animal Liberation Front attack on Louisiana State University. The analysis is based on three criteria derived from Singer’s utilitarianism: the scope of moral relevance, the weighing of conflicting interests, and the consequences of action. The thesis shows that although the actors of the Animal Liberation Front extend moral consideration to laboratory animals, in the case of the attack on Louisiana State University it was not possible to demonstrate a clear predominance of reduced suffering over the harm caused.