(Excuse me if this is old news. I just read this article recently.)
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2004/06/starobin.htmAnyone read this article by Paul Starobin in
The Atlantic? Okay. Now I'm REALLY scared shitless. Check it (emphasis mine):
(snip)
Leaving aside the question of military power,
the necessary response to terrorism is not to limit the power of the state but, rather, to bolster it, so as to preserve the basic order without which the defenseless citizen has no prospect of enjoying the splendors of liberty. In the wake of Madrid, in the wake of 9/11, in the wake of suicide bombings in Moscow subway stations and Jerusalem cafés,
the state is impelled to become even more intrusive and muscular than it already is. How well today's leaders meet this obligation to construct more-vigilant states is very likely to stand as one of history's most important criteria for assessing their stewardship.
(snip)
Not only do Americans broadly support Bush's Patriot Act, but women—who worry more than men do that they or someone close to them will fall victim to terrorism—tend to view the measure as not tough enough, according to a recent Gallup poll. Europeans are demanding closer policing of their rapidly growing Muslim minority, which now stands at 15 million in the EU.
In short, we are at the dawn of a popularly sanctioned movement toward greater authoritarianism in the domain of what is now fashionably called "homeland security."
(snip -- and here's the REAL kicker)
America illustrates the hazards of the opposite problem: too many constraints on the Daddy State. In particular,
Congress—the body positioned between the executive and the people—is proving a serious hindrance. For example, just after 9/11 alarmed legislators sensibly created a Transportation Security Agency, with broad powers to improve airport security. But since then Congress has hamstrung the agency's effort to develop a computerized profiling system that would help identify potentially dangerous passengers....
========================
I read and reread and re-reread this article for some hint of "here's a late April Fool's joke," but there was NONE. This guy is SERIOUS! I'm not sure, even, what to think about
The Atlantic's publishing this essay. Where do they stand?