Replies

For some time, I was wondering about that, too.

I don't think the Madrid precedent would work here.

The biggest difficulty I have is the general one. I think the nation is divided between those that still remember, and even know, what it has been thus far (the culture, the Constitution, free markets, individual responsibility, morals according to Judeo-Christian tradition, etc.) and those that do not even know it but want something new (revolutionaries of all sorts --- feminists, socialists, etc.). We got here as a result of growth of the second part. To predict any outcome, therefore, one needs to know quite precisely by how much the second part exceeds the first.

You suggest, for instance, that Spanish-style attack would have an opposite effect here. Twenty years ago, I'd say that you are correct without any doubt. Today, I am not so sure. Just a few years ago, could you envision that, in the midst of war against militant Islam, the country would seriously entertain a presidential candidate named Hussein who studied in Muslim schools and spend his formative years in the world-largest Muslim country? People would think you insane if you suggested that as recently as late 1980s. It's happening today.

So, returning to the scenario you propose, I am not so sure. Sep 11 has failed to unite the country, and one half of it only increased its self-hatred. Our future First Lady only now feel some pride for her country. Why would another attack have a different effect?