Some people try achieving their targets by some unusual acts.

The targets are normal but their actions are abnormal or unusual.

Generally people term them as extremists due to their abnormal actions or extreme approach.

Is it appropriate to term them as extremist even if their ultimate intentions aren't extreme?

I think it all depends on the circumstances.

Example: I need to get to the local market to pick up bread. If I hire a plane to fly over it, so I can parachute to the front door, then yes, I would call that extreme grocery shopping despite the fact that there is normally nothing unusual about picking up a loaf of bread.

hmmm...that's true, normally we prefer determining extremism by actions rather than intentions.
Interestingly, we don't feel normal actions with abnormal intentions as extremism.
example : some terrorist on his way travelling with us next seat in a plane like a gentleman till he hijacks the plane with the tip of the gun.

People are going to pay more attention to the person parachuting into the market than a man,seemingly, minding his own business on a plane. There are 200 other business men minding their business on that plane. If terrorist boarded planes waving burning flags they would cease to be a dilemma.

Some extremists are out to kill people.

Activists struggling / fighting for a common motto (say independence)

A : Adopting the way of peaceful discussion with authorities.

B: Adopting the way to fight / terror /war against authorities.

C: Supporting A directly,B Indirectly,pretending to support the authorities as well, to remain in their favour,dealing,approaching & collaborating with other nations / powers for abolishing the authorities in order to not only have own independence but also to acquire the authorities to rule them at one point of time.


The intentions of both A & B are similar & normal.but normally B are termed as EXTREMISTS.Actually C are extremists with their intention,but usually no one will feel so.