Follow us on Instagram
Try our daily mini crossword
Subscribe to the newsletter
Download the app

Wilson School leads panel on domestic effects of Sept. 11 domestic effects of Sept. 11

Sept. 11 was a "Kobe-sized event" said professor of economics and international affairs Paul Krugman — referring to the 1995 earthquake in Japan that caused thousands of deaths but had a negligible economic impact.

At yesterday's Wilson School panel discussion, professors spoke about Sept. 11 as it related to their field of expertise, some calling the effect of the attacks minor and others calling it an impetus for social change.

ADVERTISEMENT

The theme of the event — the second in a series of discussions focusing on Sept. 11 — was the effect of the attacks on various facets of domestic life. The previous panel focused on effects abroad.

Sociology professor Christopher Eisengruber moderated the panel that included economics and international affairs professor Paul Krugman, University provost and politics professor Amy Gutmann, associate professor of politics Nolan McCarty, sociology professor Sara McLanahan and Wilson School professor Frank von Hippel.

Krugman was the first speaker, saying Sept. 11's effect on the economy as a whole is "remarkably small" in comparison to the loss of life and psychological implications. He said many of the issues commonly considered a result of the war on terror — such as the budget deficit — are in fact mostly unrelated.

"Lines at the airports aren't the tip of the iceberg — they're the whole story," he said.

McCarty spoke next on the political climate since Sept. 11, using a recent series of polls to illustrate that partisanship — after briefly dipping immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks — has become more of a force in Washington than ever before.

"Trust in the Federal government is at the 2000 level," he told the audience.

ADVERTISEMENT

McCarty was followed by McLanahan, whose speech was less an evaluation of the effects of Sept. 11 than an expression of her desire for news coverage to lead the American people to support widows and single mothers.

She noted that, in contrast to the media's usual depiction of single mothers, the post-Sept. 11 coverage portrayed them as heroically raising their children after the death of their husbands.

Von Hippel followed McLanahan with a speech on the country's preparedness for a biological, chemical, radiological or nuclear attack.

After joking that "we should keep these problems in perspective," he went on to highlight the reticence of many United States institutions to protect themselves from potential terrorist attack because of cost.

Subscribe
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

The remaining panelists, Gutmann and Eisengruber, both delivered speeches about the legal implications of Sept. 11, emphasizing the need to engage in a vigorous debate about the extent to which liberty should be balanced with the need for security.

During the question-and-answer period that followed the panel, civil liberties became a focus of debate. Gutmann emphasized that it is not only the responsibility of the court, but of every citizen to debate the issue of civil liberties and decide what is constitutionally permissible.