Abstract
In 2024, China witnessed a series of indiscriminate violent attacks against civilians – referred to online as Xianzhong incidents – which triggered widespread public debate around social and legal justice, hyper-nationalism, and xenophobia. Although these attacks arguably meet the legal definition of terrorism under China's Anti-Terrorism Law, they were not officially labelled as such. This article investigates why. It argues that the Chinese state avoided invoking the terrorism label because it did not need to. Unlike separatist movements that garner international support and pose direct challenges to regime security, Xianzhong-style violence does not present an immediate threat to state security. In the absence of institutional constraints, the state can implement extraordinary measures without invoking the political and symbolic weight of terrorism. This article contributes to discussions on the politics of naming, highlighting how the selective application of the terrorism label reflects a hierarchical logic of perceived threats.