>Terrorism has never changed history in a constructive way

It's completely true, but only tautological so. If it changed history in a constructive way, we don't call it terrorism. Revisionism sucks, but it's the way a lot of institutions approach history.

Terrorism is the reason the United States is a thing

>>1964249
>the sad sack of fat in the back rethinking his choices

Agrarian reform now! Optimates delenda est!

Depends on what you mean by terrorism and by "a constructive way". If we take the wikipedia definition ("in its broadest sense, the use of intentionally indiscriminate violence (terror) in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim"), many wars and a multitude of other violent state actions count as terrorism and have obviously changed history. Were they "Constructive"? Who knows, what does that even mean.

>>1964297
This, pretty sure WWII resistance movements were considered terrorists by the Nazis. It's a case of history is written by the victors.