Sure, let’s break it down.

Here is the definition of terrorism that you posted.

Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature

Would you agree from that definition that the litmus test to determine if an act counts as terrorism has two parts?

Part one being that it must be an act of violence (in this conversation/context ‘Violence’ includes damage of property)

Part two is that it must have an idealogical component. For example, a bar-fight, or mailbox baseball would not qualify as terrorism.

Do you agree that my understanding of the posted definition of terrorism is correct?