The other twin towers that collapsed tuesday were market orthodoxy and
high-tech idolatry. I'm seeing reports of massive coordinated central bank
intervention to forestall financial panic. I cannot imagine a quick return
to 'normalcy'. It is likely that without the terror attacks, at best
economic recovery from the slowdown would have been shallow and painfully
slow. At worst was the possibility of a severe and prolonged world
recession/depression. Now it is unequivocally in the hands of the central
authorities.
If this is war; it is above all war economy. War economy is command economy.
Mobilization of the economy for war against terrorism will not be left to an
invisible hand.
The immediate response has been the injection of liquidity into financial
markets. The next step appears to be the emergency authorization of whatever
level of federal spending on security and defense infrastructure is needed
to offset the decline in consumer spending. Presumably, a third step will
soon become necessary to prevent strategic supply bottlenecks and price
gouging as consumption patterns jolt from consumer baubles to security staples.
In all likelyhood, NMD will survive symbolically, but only symbolically. The
real mobilization will have to be the labour intensive mobilization of a
population. Spin doctors and high-tech toys are effective only in the
de-mobilization of a population.
If the U.S. government thinks an anti-terrorism war can be put on
cruise-control, it is cruising for a bruising. In case anyone missed the
point, high technology is too vulnerable and those who rely excessively on
high-tech are made as vulnerable. This is even before factoring in the
commercial and intellectual property parasitism of planned obsolesence,
over-booking etc. Figuratively speaking, the terrorists simultaneously
hacked several high-technology reliant systems: air transport, financial
transactions and structural engineering. One must assume that as the U.S.
declares war on terrorism, the enemy will not simply evaporate but will seek
to identify and incapacitate other vulnerable systems.
It is hard for me to imagine being "for" or "against" what seems to be
eerily inevitable. Is one for or against a volcano or an iceberg? There will
be a military response. The sovereignty of the U.S. has unquestionably been
violated. I cannot help but think, though, that militarily responding to the
events of September 11 will require a level of concrete and frankly
collectivist thinking that is totally at odds with the abstract laissez
faire solipsism of the past two decades. Video game surgical strikes won't
cut it. Trying to have all the guns and all the butter too won't cut it.
Tom Walker
Bowen Island, BC
604 947 2213
