Democracy in America

American politics

Remembering 9/11

Human errors

Sep 11th 2011, 7:50 by A.K. | LOS ANGELES

(Throughout the day our correspondents will be sharing their thoughts on the tenth anniversary of 9/11. All of these posts can be found here.)

ON SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001, I had already been a correspondent for The Economist for four years and, as we are wont, had moved around for the publication, just then finding myself living in Hong Kong and covering Asia. It was already evening in Hong Kong and I had just returned, somewhat tired from a long day, to my flat on the 25th floor of a skyscraper in "Mid-Levels", with a view of Hong Kong, the harbour and Kowloon. Just then my assistant called and said simply: "Turn on the TV." For the rest of my night, which for America was that endlessly long morning and day, I watched.

The next morning, I walked to my office and stopped by my usual coffee bar in Lan Kwai Fong, Hong Kong's expat playground. All the regulars were there, and in each conversation, people of various nationalities were trying to make sense of what this world was now to become—now, as of September 12th, as of the day after. Anger, worry, confusion, fear—all these emotions were mixed together. I knew right away that the main significance of this dreadful event lay in what would happen next, not in what had already happened. How would America react? China? Muslims? Everybody?

There was a lot of nonsense said in those early days, as always when people must talk about something but have little new to say. I was suddenly getting lots of eager advice to cancel a trip to Indonesia. A Muslim country, you see. I went, and it was my favourite trip ever to that mystical place, easier for the lack of other travelers and just as welcoming as ever. The Schadenfreude of many mainland Chinese was harder to stomach. The unfocused jingoism of some Americans ("nuke'em back to the stone age") even harder.

The first casualty of war is truth, it is often said. Instead, it is nuance. Every individual flees to his in-group and becomes susceptible to its caricatures of the respective out-group, to what the Germans call a Feindbild, a perception of The Other as enemy. This is already an act of de-humanisation. Bad laws, more oppressive bureaucracy (at borders, in courts, in daily life), distrust in interpersonal relations invariably follow, just as one apocalyptic horseman inevitably rides close behind the one before.

Did September 11th teach us about the risks of terrorism? It should not have. The existential threat of a suitcase bomb, a rogue nuclear event, already existed before and exists still. On the other hand, September 11th itself killed about as many Americans as die each year as a result of texting while driving. Homo sapiens are bad at understanding risks relative to one another, and worse at responding proportionately. The world became a worse place on that day. In part because the terrorists made it that way. In part, because the rest of us then did the same.

Readers' comments

The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.

steveclyde

The Ebola virus kills 9 out of 10 people infected; despite how deadly this virus is, people are not writing letters to Senators demanding an expedition to the African jungles to locate the source of the virus and eradicate its existence. This is because most people are unaffected by it. Most people don't even know about it, and therefore are tolerant of its existence.

Yes, the risks of terrorism existed before 9/11, but the risks of terrorism are unknown, or perhaps unappreciated, by those who have not been affected by it. In that sense, 9/11 was a great teacher in showing the USA (the bulk of which was unexposed to terrorism on its doorstep) what terrorism can do, thereby making it appreciate the danger.

Yes, our understanding and response to risk may be faulty at times, but while an accident caused by texting is caused by foolishness, it doesn't carry the will to destroy. The end goal of the response to 9/11 wasn't merely to eliminate "accidents" but to ultimately eradicate the will to attack another.

HCzosjKSY4

You met the wrong Chinese. There will always be a few who take pleasure in the others' pain. However, many more sympathized with us that day and today.

McJakome

Schadenfreude is not only to be found in Asia. I have seen plenty of British and European examples on a variety of websites. This has intensified American reactions to the outside world, which has intensified the negative perceptions of the US.

This viscious circle is being brought to you by the dark side of human nature. If Osama bin Laden actually planned for this he was a genius [if an evil one].

GH1618

You throw out that teaser "worse at worse at responding proportionately" without explaining exactly what you mean. If you are caught texting while driving, you will be given a citation and allowed to drive on. If you are caught with an improvised explosive device, the consequences will be far more severe. Is the response proportionate to the possible number of deaths? No. Is the disproportion justified? Unequivocally yes.

jouris

The first casualty of war is . . . nuance.

Perhaps the most profound insight I have read in a long time. Thank you.

Jaylat

I had almost the exact same experience, living in HK at the time (in a Midlevels high rise, where I was hosting a writers' group that evening). I likely walked right past your coffee bar in LKF the next AM. It was the walk from Midlevels down to Central that I recalled the most, like going back into a strange new world, everything different but still eerily the same.

About Democracy in America

In this blog, our correspondents share their thoughts and opinions on America's kinetic brand of politics and the policy it produces. The blog is named after the study of American politics and society written by Alexis de Tocqueville, a French political scientist, in the 1830s

Advertisement

Trending topics

Read comments on the site's most popular topics

Advertisement

Products & events