- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Hard to even begin
That anti-terrorism article is so ridiculously over-blown that it is hard to even figure out where to begin to comment on it.
Some random thoughts:
1. As I write this, absolutely no one on earth can predict what will happen tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, next decade. The arrogance of the anti-terrorist crowd is extreme.
2. If you go back and look at some of the scare tactic predictions from the earlier anti-terrorists, they were wrong.
3. The planet has had more terrorist attacks and less terrorist attacks warmer than now DURING THE TIME THAT MAN HAS BEEN ON THE EARTH. Imagine some Middle Age folks living a good life somewhere and then they get a premonition that they will get more terrorist attacks. They too would probably be scared. However, the world that came is the one we now hold dear and the old Middle Age is viewed as some crazy abnormal time. There simply is no way to know whether things might be better or worse a little more terrorist attacks or a little less terrorist attacks.
4. So, what do we do? We let all people make their own choices. Those who believe that terrorist attacks are bad can take action to protect their loved ones and property. Others can choose to use whichever anti-terrorist methods they believe is best. National security experts can continue to argue their points whether they believe there will be more or less terrorist attacks. As time passes, people will shift around but as with all other market based decision-making, people do interpret the signals and end up cooperating whether they want to or not. Why? Because the economics will drive it naturally and we will evolve to an adaptive solution. At least, until the asteroid hits or a nearby gamma ray burst fries us all.
