The New York Times, September 25, 2001

Liberals' Ideology Challenged by Urge to Fight Terrorism
By Felicia R. Lee

For many liberals in New York, these are confusing times, as they try
to balance their ideals about what the nation should be with their
fears of a crisis that threatens to dwarf issues like civil liberties
and racism.

Some believe that Americans for now have to put aside their
differences on issues like supporting the president or accepting
racial profiling in order to identify terrorists. Others argue that
the worst outcome of the terrorist attacks would be for Americans to
follow authorities blindly into war or to tamp down their criticism of
social ills.

In dozens of interviews across the New York area, ordinary men and
women, as well as those active in organizations working for social
change, talked about what it meant to be liberal after Sept. 11.

"We have to cherish our rights as leftists, as liberals," said Maurice
Berger, 45, a cultural and social critic who lives on the Upper West
Side and is a senior fellow at the New School University. "I don't
want to see the country turn its back on civil liberties, when
people's phones are tapped or people are pulled off planes because
their skins are dark."

But Betsy Llanos, 32, a sales clerk at the Columbia University
bookstore, who calls herself "very liberal," said, "We wouldn't have
so many problems if we would inspect these people from other
countries."

New York City has historically voted Democratic and has been more
supportive of abortion rights, labor unions and gays than much of the
rest of the nation.

It is a measure of the times that with the mayoral primary today --
and the efforts to extend Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani's tenure -- even
many liberals say Mr. Giuliani has been great in the last two weeks.

"If we knew that we were going to have a tragedy like this every six
months, I'd love to have Giuliani," said Bill Rosenthal, a Hunter
College professor who was attending a peace rally at Columbia
University yesterday. "People are forgetting what happened before
Sept. 11 and the problems we had," he said, mentioning his particular
dislike of Mr. Giuliani's school budget cuts.

Many liberals are worried that patriotism will be narrowly identified
as the province of some groups or some political ideologies. At the
New York Urban League in Harlem, its president, Dennis M. Walcott,
said there were many blacks and dark-skinned Hispanics proudly waving
flags and yet wincing at the idea that Arab-Americans could be
racially profiled the same way they are.

On the Columbia campus, some students who think of themselves as
liberal said they sensed a change in acceptance of public criticism of
the country or President Bush.

"Three weeks ago, it was O.K. to be a dissident" said Jason Paez, 20,
a junior majoring in economics. "Now, it's our duty to stand
together. We are facing a lot worse than a president with a low
I.Q. and delusions of grandeur."

Many who are otherwise dovish said their feelings about military
response were complicated because the enemy is not so clear and this
time the personal losses hit so close to home.

"I think if you raise the political consequences of the attack, people
see you as heartless," said Andrew Stettner, the executive director of
Jews for Racial & Economic Justice.

Mr. Stettner said that although he saw a continuing robust liberal
commitment to civil liberties, "I've been surprised that a lot of
people are willing to support a level of military action that they
would not have accepted before."

Along those lines, Judith Stallwert, 51, a secretary in Montclair,
N.J., said, "In college, I joined movements against the war in
Vietnam, but I don't think I would join protests this time, for this
war. I don't want to see people die and I don't want to raise my
children during a horrible time. On the other hand, I don't want my
grandchildren to one day live in a world with terrorism and fear."