Fathers of Conscience: Mixed-Race Inheritance in the Antebellum South Book

Stephen Flynn's book is essentially a primer to goad America into better disaster preparation. He highlights America's vulnerability and lumps both man-made disasters such as terrorism with natural ones such as earthquakes. He has essentially concluded that "acts of terror cannot always be prevented" and therefore it makes sense, from his viewpoint, to make America more "resilient" so that when the inevitable happens, we'll be better prepared.

I think there's a world of difference between natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes and forest fires (where the risks are fairly well known and the nation is fairly well prepared for such disasters), and terrorism. In my view, terrorism is a much more substantial problem, particularly if enemy combatants get weapons of mass destruction. The worst possible catastrophe is a terrorist group getting dozens of nuclear weapons, smuggling them inside America, and detonating them simultaneously by remote control. That danger, alone, while statistically unlikely and difficult to execute, demands a sufficient prevention strategy, and Flynn doesn't provide this. Disaster mitigation won't help much if most of our major cities have been reduced to smoldering rubble.

So, in my view, Flynn's strategy is flawed.

The correct strategy, in my view, is to reform America in serious ways to substantially reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism. And that means a new understanding of terrorism as well as substantial political reform brought about by a Second Constitutional Convention.

Flynn is one of those experts who, like Hoffman and Allison, see terrorism as essentially a government and military and police problem. And I think that's a mistake. I think terrorism is a bigger problem -- it's a citizens' problem. We're the ones who suffer when it happens. So citizens need to prevent it. And as citizens we have wider latitude and authority to act than government officials have within their current framework. We can change this framework.

Terrorism, in my view, is "violence against individual rights". Start with this definition and a solution will follow logically. One can suppose there are three types of terrorists -- criminals (neighbors who violate our rights), tyrants (our own government officials who violate our rights) and foreign terrorists (powerful individuals abroad or heads of state.) All three types must be prevented. It's not enough for government by itself to try to fight terrorism, because in trying to fight terrorism, government may become a terrorist towards its own people. It's a multi-faceted problem, larger but solvable. We can't fight one form of terrorism by exacerbating another. But this happens routinely in airports: to prevent airline hijackings (crime) security guards frisk every passenger (a form of tyranny that passengers put up with despite being treated like criminals.)

My book "Common Sense II: How to Prevent the Three Types of Terrorism" (Amazon/Kindle 184 pages) spells out the logic for a prevention strategy. The essential concept linking an effort to prevent each type of terrorism is the application of light, meaning information, exposure, and awareness. For example, to prevent crime, we must identify all movement in public while strengthening privacy. For this to happen, citizens must agree to such monitoring, and for this to happen, people must become real citizens, not merely apathetic consumers and shoppers which characterize most Americans today. The concept of citizenship is examined, again, using a sense of light; citizenship should be a contract between individual and state with specific responsibilities and privileges. It's possible, then, to prevent every instance of home-grown terrorism using this method. The rest of my book shows how one can apply the concept of light to prevent tyranny and foreign terrorism. For example, I think the architecture of government requires an overhaul so that America can make steady long-term foreign policy which consistently rewards friends and punishes enemies; but today it can't do this because administrations change every eight years, sometimes after only four. I propose a revised architecture based on lessons from history and political philosophy.

My strategy will prevent all types of terrorism, including smuggled nuclear bombs. In contrast, Flynn's strategy is merely a grocery list of suggestions of ways to contain the debris following the inevitable disasters. My strategy is brief, rational, non-religious, written by a citizen for citizens, non-technical. Be prepared: there are some controversial ideas (one expert found it "bracing"). But my book can protect America. It's plain logic from one citizen to another. If reforming America is impossible, then we're stuck with having to consider disaster recovery and mitigation efforts such as those proposed by Flynn. Better to reform America and prevent terrorism. It's less messy, safer, cleaner. Please read my book and judge for yourself. I challenge Mr. Flynn to debate the merits of my strategy.