Soundings, October 2001
Newspaper editorialists and readers are rightly debating how America should wage war, provide for national security, and restore economic health. But many are exploiting the atrocities of September 11 to advance or attack more mundane social and political policies.
* * *
"Our military defense will surely be more effective if we simultaneously work to fight economic deprivation, injustice and despondency at home and abroad." M. Katherine Shear and Charles F. Reynolds III, Pittsburgh. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 20.
* * *
"While [your] editorial correctly points the finger at oil and the Middle East as chief supplier as a major issue in our response, you have belittled the two underlying root causes that we import a larger portion of oil now thanin 1973. Those two causes . . . are the global decline in production and the tremendous increase in oil consumption in this country. The latter can be affected by choice of vehicle and has not been assisted by the love affair with SUVs." Frank O. Clark, Dunstable, Mass. "Letters," Investor's Business Daily, Sept. 21.
* * *
"President Bush's vital task of building a global coalition against terrorism would be given greater moral and political power if his administration fulfilled its treaty obligations to the rest of the world by paying its dues to the United Nations in full." John Langmore, Director, Social Policy Division, United Nations. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 18.
* * *
"As the world takes action against [terrorism], we have all been reminded of the need to address the conditions that permit the growth of such hatred and depravity. We must confront violence, bigotry and hatred even more resolutely. The United Nations' work must continue as we address the ills of conflict, ignorance, poverty and disease." Kofi A. Annan. secretary-general of the U. N. New York Times, Sept. 21.
* * *
"I'm hopeful that the outpouring of patriotic display means that we'll all live less atomistically, gripe less about paying taxes and stop rewarding elected officials who pander to our most selfish instincts at the expense of building community." Scott Douglas, Bethesda, Maryland. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 18.
* * *
"Reconstruction after the Sept. 11 tragedy can be carried out with an eye toward geographic diversification of New York City's commercial real estate market. The first steps of such an approach would include better commuter connections to Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn and 125th Street in Manhattan. " Raymond H. Brescia, New York. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 18.
* * *
"The large-scale layoffs announced by several major United States companies are a national disgrace and are helping the terrorists win this war." Edward Cohen, Fountain Hills, Arizona. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 20.
* * *
"If the government chooses to invade Afghanistan, what if the mission were expanded to include a program to feed and educate the children of the country. Maybe as friends, not occupiers, we can win the peace?" Joel Margolese, Andover, Mass. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 19.
* * *
"Take my money, increase my taxes and provide the government with the money to perform those functions that are critical to this country's well-being: safety, access to quality medical care, education and child care." Arden R. Rauch, Schenectady, N.Y. "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 21.
* * *
"Justice has a distributive face. Lasting peace cannot be expected without tackling tough issues of global economic inequality." Eric W. Orts, a professor in the ethics program at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, "Letters," New York Times, Sept. 22.
* * *
But the winner in the race to exploit September's atrocities is economist Paul Krugman, a New York Times oped columnist, who used the events to indict private enterprise and limited government. His implicit premise was that markets produce the shoddiest services at the cheapest prices, while public companies (such as the Post Office, presumably) offer top-notch services that taxpayers must be willing to subsidize.
"Tuesday's tragedy was partly self-inflicted. Why did we leave ourselves so vulnerable? For this is a tale not just of villainy, but also of penny-pinching that added up to disaster—and a system that encouraged, even enforced, that penny-pinching. It's a problem that goes beyond terrorism. Something is amiss with our political philosophy. . . .
"This is an issue that goes well beyond terrorism. Last year Laurie Garrett, the author of The Coming Plague, followed up with a chilling book titled Betrayal of Trust: The Collapse of Global Public Health. The story she tells is ominously similar to that of airport security: a crucial but unglamorous piece of our public infrastructure has been allowed to fray to the point of collpase—partly because we have relied on the private sector to do the public sector's job, partly because public agencies have been starved of resources by politicians busily posturing against 'big government'. . . . . [I hope] Americans will be willing to learn one of the key lessons of last week's horror: there are some things on which the government must spend money, and not all of them involve soldiers." Paul Krugman, "Paying the Price," New York Times, Sept. 16.
What renders Krugman's exploitation of the atrocities more obnoxious than similar acts by others is that he used his first column after September 11 to denounce people who proposed pro-capitalist means of restoring America's economic health.
"Now for the bad news. After the attacks, I found myself wondering whether some politicians would try to exploit the horror to push their usual partisan agendas. Then I chided myself for such an uncharitable thought. But it seems you can't be too cynical; sure enough, the push is already on to sell tax breaks for corporations and a cut in the capital gains tax as a response to terrrorism." Paul Krugman, "After the Horror," New York Times, Sept.14.