Here is Christopher Hitchens' view of the events which have happended since 911, enjoy


By Christopher Hitchens
March 10 2002

There are days when it seems more than six months ago, and there are days when it
seems like yesterday. There are also days when it seems like a clash of
civilisations. War, and the rumour of war, dominates all conversations in the sense
of being one millimetre below even the most ordinary of them. Until recently, at
least in my home town of Washington DC, the talk was more about the next war - in
Iraq - than it was about the last one. Lately, of course, the arrival of
flag-shrouded coffins has refocused attention on the unfinished combat in
Afghanistan. For specialists, there is the more in-depth review of potential future
interventions, whether they be in former Soviet Georgia, or the Philippines, or
anywhere else that politicised Islam might challenge a friend or an ally or a client.
Meanwhile, the culture of surveillance and "security" is rubbed into anybody who
wants to take even the briefest plane trip.

One way of summarising all this is to say that, in the middle of the most beautiful
autumn season I can remember, the United States switched from the pursuit of
happiness to the pursuit of sternness. Of course, the passing parade goes on.
Hollywood continues to churn out either teen-market tripe or war movies designed for
adolescents. The Disney Corporation has chosen this month to replace a fairly serious
news show on its ABC news channel with a comedian. But do not be fooled by the
apparent continuities. The strategic majority of the American establishment, and the
greater part of the American people, are resolved to do "whatever it takes" to erase
the humiliation and fear and rage that followed the aggression against civil society
on September 11.

In one of his hysterical cassette-sermons recorded before that date, Osama bin Laden
said that the Afghan and Islamic defeat of the Red Army and the Soviet Union had been
the hard part. The overthrow and destruction of the next superpower, the US, would be
relatively easy. The Americans had run away from Somalia. They were saturated in
godless pleasure, corruption and - well, he didn't actually call it the pursuit of
happiness but he might as well have done. I sometimes wonder if he has any idea how
mistaken he was. (Wherever he and his friends now are, they cannot surely be telling
each other that things are going according to the divine plan.)

A gigantic process of American rearmament is under way, with almost no political
argument about its size or its duration. On campuses, students line up to offer
themselves to work for the defence and intelligence agencies. Anyone in a uniform -
be it a police or fire department rig-out or a military outfit - is a cultural hero.
The few voices that counselled restraint in dealing with Iraq have been stilled. Does
Saddam Hussein have any plans to use his weapons of mass destruction? If he does, he
has signed his death warrant because nobody now will oppose the idea of smashing him
before he has the chance. Do the European or Australasian allies have any qualms? Too
bad if they do: they are to be consulted only out of politeness. Want to laugh at the
crudeness of the "axis of evil"? Go ahead - see if we care.

This may sound a touch ugly or intolerant, and, indeed, sometimes it comes from
rather unpolished people. However, I must say, in fairness, that the public mood is
too unanimous and too decided to require much jingoism. There are still a lot of
flags on display, but most people don't feel the need to affirm themselves in such a
manner. They just count themselves in. Insults directed at American Muslims are very
few, and they incur widespread social and political disapproval. Some cliches are
enduring because they are true: the world and everything in it did indeed change on
that morning six months ago, and we will be counting from that date for the rest of
our lives.

On 2002-03-08 21:59, HopefulCynic68 wrote:

On 2002-03-08 13:25, Jesse Manoogian wrote:
You know, some of this "real world" garbage here really, really brings to mind msm's posts. Do you think "msm" is really Hopeful Cynic?

Well, no, I don't really think so myself. :lol:

OK, you deny it plausibly. Even though your remarks on what you claim "reality" to be, used to bolster Red Zone views, are sure a pretty good blood match, one must admit. And, unlike Marc Lamb, you're also the right generation. I guess that means we still don't know who, if anyone, MSM is.

:sigh:

March 10, 2002 Talk about it E-mail story Print


A CHANGED AMERICA
Civil Liberties Take Back Seat to Safety
Law: Some hard-won freedoms give way to more police powers and self-censorship.

Top Stories


By HENRY WEINSTEIN, DAREN BRISCOE and MITCHELL LANDSBERG, Times Staff Writers


American civil liberties are as fixed and steady an influence in national life as the stock market--and every bit as elastic.

This doesn't sound like an article on how things have been changing back six months after September 11...rather it sounds like an article on what did happen six months ago.

Almost all the incidents, especially the anti-Middle-Eastern ones in here, happened in September or October in the weeks immediately after the attack. Would anyone get fired for writing a column against Bush now?

For all the immense change that it sounds like, it's amazing how hard it is for some of us to see all of this they mention. For a student listening to the radio and deciding which CD's to buy, talking with other people on campus and hearing about Limp Bizkit's latest misdeeds, learning about the different sports in the 2002 Olympics, talking about drugs and living at college, reading that article sounded like an alien experience (even if appalling). All that self-censorship is something I never seem to hear or see or read from other kids...or even very often from adults...it's unfamiliar to someone living at college. No one from Gen-X or younger cares if someone speaks out against the nation and its policy, or cares if what they're saying goes against the mainstream.

So what if something you believe is un-American? I say anything I want to and I don't feel any effects. Is the changing really this magnitudinous? And really this long-lasting? I don't have any profession that's in danger. But one thing I really bet is that the authors of that article were Boomers (Silents would be possible too, they've been dealing with the system their whole lives and six months ago they got shut out and spanked by the system).

They identified that this was the tenth report in a series of articles that they've been writing at an "occasional" interval since September 11, after they decided in September to write in many parts observations on how things have changed since then. By this point, these articles are sounding more and more irrelevant.

Each side of the generation is taking its own path. In college, as in other aspects. I feel so apart from the tongue-censoring, don't-criticize-the-president pressure of the adult world here, and in addition I don't see any other threats to freedom of students' speech on campus. But on the East Coast, students at Brown have been having their basic civil liberties of speech dismantled over the past several years. The Ivy League colleges haven't faced protest because the students going to these colleges are so preppy and conservative. Princeton banned its Nude Olympics, and when it did, the students all complied instead of railing against the clampdown, worrying what would happen to their grades if they did. And yet at Chico State, they're cracking down on alcohol and drugs everywhere and students freely use them instead of obeying. All alcohol is forbidden at Chico which has been trying to remake its image as an academic college and yet it still gets voted as the world's biggest "party school" every year. The teens who want to look up to adults and obey their rules will all go into the Ivy League colleges or, if they can't get in there, to colleges that are becoming stratified as more and more conservative; while the who feel free to be rebellious will all go into the "regular" colleges. When they protest, it's not going to be in order to petition for their rights to be taken away, it's going to be against social injustices in America (or elsewhere) or sometimes even to keep campus policy permissive. After high school, the generation has become no longer unified. The wall has gone up to separate the colleges and I suppose they will become more and more unlike each other. Which is OK. Because one kind of kids can have their Brown and Harvard and William & Mary, and get what they want, and the other kind can have their school, and get what they want. The Divided Generation has been leaving its mark in what they will let colleges do, and it looks like the choices will be there for some time.

Quick analysis of our circumstances and national mindset six months post-9/11.


As noted, many of the immediate [over]reactions are damping down. We should in fact be pleased with this as they were in large measure pathological. Again as noted, there is a desire to avoid disruption and to avoid war. If events permit, a society (regardless of Turning) attempts to proceed placidly and without serious concerns. What marks the difference between non-social-moment Turnings and their more turbulent intervals is how easy it is to do this. How volatile is the society? How much does it take to get people excited? How much will people ignore? There is always a dynamic tension between the desire for calm and enjoyment, and the sense that things need fixing. What distinguishes an Awakening or Crisis from a High or Unraveling is the relative strength of those two conflicting impulses. In a High or Unraveling, people are more willing to endure flaws in the culture or institutions in order to enjoy life without cares. In an Awakening or Crisis, people are more willing to endure cares and conflict in order to fix the flaws.


In the current saeculum, both the High and the Awakening featured questionable wars that could be traced to failures of American foreign policy, pursued by dubious strategy to less than satisfactory conclusions. Neither war was popular or enjoyed real public support. But Vietnam was far more disruptive to our national fabric than Korea, because criticism of our Cold War policies was higher and desire for calm was lower.


There are going to be further disruptions: more terrorist attacks, more combat abroad, disputes over where Bush wants to take this, domestic policy disputes regarding energy, the environment, corporate influence on the government; foreign disputes regarding the extent of American power and accountability for same. That's a given and does not say what Turning we're in one way or the other. The question is this. How volatile are we, as a society? How strong has our desire to fix things become, and is it (given a bit more prodding) sufficient to overcome our desire to have fun without worrying?


We are presently, I would say, trying to slip back into 3T-mode. That's surely normal. It happens after all flash-in-the-pan pre-Crisis flares (e.g. the Stamp Act furor or Bleeding Kansas). But it also happens after genuine catalysts (e.g. the brooding calm between the Boston Tea Party and the first outbreak of fighting, or between the 1929 stock market crash and the failure of the banking system in 1932). The difference is measured both in time, and in how subsequent flareups are treated. After Bleeding Kansas, the John Brown raid did not provoke secession -- but Lincoln's election did. It's reasonable therefore to call, in hindsight, the raid a pre-Crisis flare and the election a genuine catalyst.


Which are we in currently? Again, the only way to really tell is in hindsight. When nothing is happening, the question isn't asked. We will have a better indication the next time something serious happens. But one indication, for me, is the response to the Enron collapse. In objective terms, the Bush administration isn't any more corrupt or corporate-beholden than the Clinton administration was (alas, it is also no less so). But Clinton, and the system over which he presided, got a pass. (He was impeached for something trivial, not for the corruption that was endemic to his administration.) Will Bush? Will the system now? It's the same system -- are we finally ready to fix it? There are indications that we are.


We will certainly have another large-scale objective event of some kind that fits the 4T paradigm within the next couple of years. (We do in all Turnings.) Our response to the next such event will give us a clearer indication of where we are.

On 2002-03-10 16:54, Jesse Manoogian wrote:

The Ivy League colleges haven't faced protest because the students going to these colleges are so preppy and conservative.

i swear to christ i've gone over this before, jesse. they are not all "preppy and conservative". sure dartmouth and princeton could likely be characterized as conservative, but harvard? cornell? the shoe simply does not fit.

All alcohol is forbidden at Chico which has been trying to remake its image as an academic college and yet it still gets voted as the world's biggest "party school" every year.

i've heard this claim (voted world's biggest party school) said about many, many schools. tell me, in whatever poll you read that in, is chico not ranked with the others on the list because "you don't rank the professionals with the amateurs", too? :smile:


TK

On 2002-03-09 18:03, Tristan Jones wrote:
Well it has been 6 months since the 911 attack, well back here in Australia we have seem gotten back into a 3T mood. Maybe something similar is happening in the United States, your opinion?

The mood seems to be stabilizing here somewhat.

Not *ALL* of the students going to these colleges are preppy and conservative; I'm not (quite a few of my classmates are preppy but VERY few are conservative!) When Mallard Fillmore blasts a school (as he did Harvard and Berkeley), that's a sign the school is *NOT* conservative...

On 2002-03-10 13:28, Tristan Jones wrote:
Here is Christopher Hitchens' view of the events which have happended since 911, enjoy


By Christopher Hitchens
March 10 2002

There are days when it seems more than six months ago, and there are days when it
seems like yesterday. There are also days when it seems like a clash of
civilisations. War, and the rumour of war, dominates all conversations in the sense
of being one millimetre below even the most ordinary of them. Until recently, at
least in my home town of Washington DC, the talk was more about the next war - in
Iraq - than it was about the last one. Lately, of course, the arrival of
flag-shrouded coffins has refocused attention on the unfinished combat in
Afghanistan. For specialists, there is the more in-depth review of potential future
interventions, whether they be in former Soviet Georgia, or the Philippines, or
anywhere else that politicised Islam might challenge a friend or an ally or a client.
Meanwhile, the culture of surveillance and "security" is rubbed into anybody who
wants to take even the briefest plane trip.

One way of summarising all this is to say that, in the middle of the most beautiful
autumn season I can remember, the United States switched from the pursuit of
happiness to the pursuit of sternness. Of course, the passing parade goes on.
Hollywood continues to churn out either teen-market tripe or war movies designed for
adolescents. The Disney Corporation has chosen this month to replace a fairly serious
news show on its ABC news channel with a comedian. But do not be fooled by the
apparent continuities. The strategic majority of the American establishment, and the
greater part of the American people, are resolved to do "whatever it takes" to erase
the humiliation and fear and rage that followed the aggression against civil society
on September 11.

In one of his hysterical cassette-sermons recorded before that date, Osama bin Laden
said that the Afghan and Islamic defeat of the Red Army and the Soviet Union had been
the hard part. The overthrow and destruction of the next superpower, the US, would be
relatively easy. The Americans had run away from Somalia. They were saturated in
godless pleasure, corruption and - well, he didn't actually call it the pursuit of
happiness but he might as well have done. I sometimes wonder if he has any idea how
mistaken he was. (Wherever he and his friends now are, they cannot surely be telling
each other that things are going according to the divine plan.)

A gigantic process of American rearmament is under way, with almost no political
argument about its size or its duration. On campuses, students line up to offer
themselves to work for the defence and intelligence agencies. Anyone in a uniform -
be it a police or fire department rig-out or a military outfit - is a cultural hero.
The few voices that counselled restraint in dealing with Iraq have been stilled. Does
Saddam Hussein have any plans to use his weapons of mass destruction? If he does, he
has signed his death warrant because nobody now will oppose the idea of smashing him
before he has the chance. Do the European or Australasian allies have any qualms? Too
bad if they do: they are to be consulted only out of politeness. Want to laugh at the
crudeness of the "axis of evil"? Go ahead - see if we care.

This may sound a touch ugly or intolerant, and, indeed, sometimes it comes from
rather unpolished people. However, I must say, in fairness, that the public mood is
too unanimous and too decided to require much jingoism. There are still a lot of
flags on display, but most people don't feel the need to affirm themselves in such a
manner. They just count themselves in. Insults directed at American Muslims are very
few, and they incur widespread social and political disapproval. Some cliches are
enduring because they are true: the world and everything in it did indeed change on
that morning six months ago, and we will be counting from that date for the rest of
our lives.

Sounds like, under a thin veneer of persistent 3T behavior, Mr. Hitchens sees us as being very definitely in early 4T.

Signs of 3T..

I own and operate a tourist business.

After April of 2001, and the stock market slide, no calls..nothing. Summer travel was way off.
After Sept. 11, no calls, nothing.
2001 was a business disaster.

Suddenly...since February 1st...the US is traveling again (or making plans to do so... Inquiries and reservations).

Barbara, I agree with you that everyone should have the opportunity to speak English and to assimilate, and we should help people do this. About bi-lingual education though, I don't agree with voters and politicians taking it away unless they can find a workable substitute. There should be more of a compromise here. At least a teacher who teaches students who don't speak English, should also speak the language which the students speak. Otherwise I don't see how such a teacher can communicate with the students. Forcing all foreign-born students who don't speak English into English-only classes is drastic and racist IMO. I think the educators can decide based on studies and experience of what works, and institute that, rather than have some right-wing High Tech Executive put an initiative on the ballot that forces all teachers to teach the way he thinks they should (that's what happened in CA).

Hi!

Idealisicaly bilingual education is a great idea. Being from a small rural community the cost is tremendous. As a communinty we have a difficult time recruting teachers of one language let alone 2. It is not the pay because we are one of the highest paying districts in the state of Colorado.
The question must be asked, are we training bilingual teachers for the future? If we are not where will they come from? The United States is not a small country. We are ethincaly diverse. We are considered the "melting pot" of the world. Many of our ancestors came from non english speaking countries. They were not given the option of choosing their native language. What is bilingual? Is it english-spanish, english-japanese,english-chinese(they are the next biggest majority in the world),or is it english-french (the next most spokenlanguage in the world). Maybe we should allow the govt. to mandate what the language is.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nd boom '59 on 2002-03-11 17:57 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nd boom '59 on 2002-03-11 18:03 ]</font>

Hi!

On 2002-03-10 23:29, Eric A Meece wrote:
Barbara, I agree with you that everyone should have the opportunity to speak English and to assimilate, and we should help people do this. About bi-lingual education though, I don't agree with voters and politicians taking it away unless they can find a workable substitute. There should be more of a compromise here. At least a teacher who teaches students who don't speak English, should also speak the language which the students speak. Otherwise I don't see how such a teacher can communicate with the students. Forcing all foreign-born students who don't speak English into English-only classes is drastic and racist IMO. I think the educators can decide based on studies and experience of what works, and institute that, rather than have some right-wing High Tech Executive put an initiative on the ballot that forces all teachers to teach the way he thinks they should (that's what happened in CA).

The ballot initiative passed. The school system thus has its orders from its proper masters, yet in many places in the school system they are openly defying it, partly proving my earlier point.

On 2002-03-10 23:06, cbailey wrote:
Signs of 3T..

I own and operate a tourist business.

After April of 2001, and the stock market slide, no calls..nothing. Summer travel was way off.
After Sept. 11, no calls, nothing.
2001 was a business disaster.

Suddenly...since February 1st...the US is traveling again (or making plans to do so... Inquiries and reservations).

I've noticed. It's as if the pseudo-4T mode has passed, like some late September snow storm, leaving the warmth of mid-late Autumn in its place.

On 2002-03-11 22:27, HopefulCynic68 wrote:

I've noticed. It's as if the pseudo-4T mode has passed, like some late September snow storm, leaving the warmth of mid-late Autumn in its place.

Yep, reminds me of the Halloween night snow that Boone, N.C. had in 1993. About an inch fell that night, but all melted off the next day. Still, like 9/11, it was a very distinct reminder that winter was right around the corner.

On 2002-03-10 23:29, Eric A Meece wrote:
Barbara, I agree with you that everyone should have the opportunity to speak English and to assimilate, and we should help people do this. About bi-lingual education though, I don't agree with voters and politicians taking it away unless they can find a workable substitute. There should be more of a compromise here. At least a teacher who teaches students who don't speak English, should also speak the language which the students speak. Otherwise I don't see how such a teacher can communicate with the students. Forcing all foreign-born students who don't speak English into English-only classes is drastic and racist IMO. I think the educators can decide based on studies and experience of what works, and institute that, rather than have some right-wing High Tech Executive put an initiative on the ballot that forces all teachers to teach the way he thinks they should (that's what happened in CA).

Nonsense! There does not need to be a "compromise" and it is not "racist" to expect immigrants to learn English. In fact, in California it was more often than not the immigrant parents themselves who wanted to end the "poly-lingual" experiment in the schools! And that experiment quite frankly was a disaster, since it left a generation and a half of immigrant kids lacking in the English skills needed to rise economically!

Eric wrote: "At least a teacher who teaches students who don't speak English, should also speak the language which the students speak. Otherwise I don't see how such a teacher can communicate with the students. Forcing all foreign-born students who don't speak English into English-only classes is drastic and racist IMO."

As a language teacher I can tell that you need to visit a foreign language class, maybe a Goethe Institute class in Germany, where you will find Nigerians, Pakistanis, Turks, and Russians, all in the same class, and guess what? The teacher knows NONE of their languages! And guess what again? They all learn German in the class!

Pure silliness to think that if you delay pushing English in the schools that somehow that will be better for the kids! All research into language learning shows that the earlier you introduce the foreign language, the better! There is no evidence that waiting is beneficial.

The history of language instruction earlier in America for its immigrants is instructive: imagine a NYC grade-school around 1910 full of Eastern Europeans, Germans, Italians,and Jews speaking Russian or Yiddish or Polish or German, etc. Were these kids catered to in each of their languages? No! They were there to learn English as quickly as possible for the economic survival of their families! Why? Because English is the language of America!

And do you think their families would have been happy if the newest generation were learning ONLY the language of the old country in school? That would have been seen as sabotage, preventing them from realizing the American dream. And that would be truly racist!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SJ on 2002-03-12 10:43 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SJ on 2002-03-12 10:49 ]</font>

On 2002-03-12 10:41, SJ wrote:

Nonsense!....!....!....Pure silliness....!....!....!....!....!....And that would be truly racist!

jesus, sj. you sure get amped up about this.


TK

"Yep, reminds me of the Halloween night snow that Boone, N.C. had in 1993. About an inch fell that night, but all melted off the next day. Still, like 9/11, it was a very distinct reminder that winter was right around the corner."


"I'll never forget that night. Ohio State beat Penn State in a rare night game in Ohio Stadium. Even rarer still was all the snow that fell that night. It was great, ABC sports opened the pre-game with Let It Snow while showing a fan in the stands dressed up as Santa and Kieth Jackson bellowing, Whoa, Nelly, the weather outside is frightful!" :lol:


p.s. Winter is actually still another month and a half away on October 31. In terms of "years" that's roughly... ten!




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-03-12 10:51 ]</font>

On 2002-03-12 10:46, TrollKing wrote:

On 2002-03-12 10:41, SJ wrote:

Nonsense!....!....!....Pure silliness....!....!....!....!....!....And that would be truly racist!

jesus, sj. you sure get amped up about this.


TK

Ha! I just tend to take no prisoners when I see misinformation! :smile:

On 2002-03-12 10:54, SJ wrote:

Ha! I just tend to take no prisoners when I see misinformation! :smile:

i'll make a note of it for future reference. :smile:


TK

In North carolina, maybe. But what if you live in Alaska, or even Minnesotta (or Maple Heights, Ohio, like me)? I hate November lake effect blizzards because I know that I might not see the ground again until Easter :smile:

Was the bi-lingual experiment a failure? So many people say. Does that mean there should never be experiments, and just teach the way it's always done? No.

I don't think the voters should have decided this based on an initiative. If the educators are trying to work around it, so much the better.

Perhaps SJ can you tell me how students can learn a new language if noone there can point out the meanings of the new words in the old language? I just think it would be easier if the teachers speak the native language.

It's important for all students to learn English as quickly as possible. The question is what is the best way. Also, I like the suggestion that more people in America should learn other languages, especially Spanish since that is not only easier but is closest to us and is the second most-common language spoken in the USA.

We Americans are the only ones who think everyone here should speak one language, and that everybody else should speak English. People in other countries speak many languages. We are spoiled by our geographic location.

Eric wrote: "Perhaps SJ can you tell me how students can learn a new language if noone there can point out the meanings of the new words in the old language? I just think it would be easier if the teachers speak the native language."

And how did you at age 6 months begin to learn English when you had NO language for a comparison?!

Signs, gestures, intonation, acting things out: there are many beginning textbooks for foreign languages in use in colleges and high schools right now with not one single word of English in them.

You really need to sign up for a Berlitz or Goethe Institute course and experience how it is done without English or any other language besides the target language.

It is not necessarily easier to compare the foreign language constantly with the native one. In fact, the old language can be interfering with the new one.

Agreed, we do not want to beat down the immigrant culture: let the descendants learn folk-dances and keep the old language alive, if they want. (In general though I find 4th-generation hyphenated Americans ridiculous.)

It is a myth that Spanish is easiest: talk with some Spanish teachers about that! The highest flunk-out rate in 5 schools I know of occurs in Spanish I and II. And the Spanish III and IV classes are smaller than the Latin and German ones.

So sign up for a foreign language class where it is guaranteed you will not hear English spoken.

Trust me on this: I can handle 3 languages!
:smile:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SJ on 2002-03-12 13:55 ]</font>