It didn’t change the trajectory, but those attacks were much more effective than even Al Qaeda thought they would be. They provided the excuse the American fascists were looking for to further their own plans without much push back.
I think it delayed the inevitable. By the 90s, right wing American extremism was on the rise. 9/11 put up a facade of unity (as long as you didn’t look middle eastern). The right wing movements went quiet for 15 years. America returned to trajectory in 2016.
I’d argue neoconservativism started with WW2, but neoliberalism is probably better tied to Nixon. So I agree, 9/11 was just a continuation of neocon power grabs, but invoking post-WW2 “capitalism” doesn’t make much sense to me; the New Deal was comparatively great for workers. Neoconservativism isn’t really an economic movement like neoliberalism is.
Did this attack really cause a change in trajectory though?
I think capitalism has been leading the US down this path since the second world war.
It didn’t change the trajectory, but those attacks were much more effective than even Al Qaeda thought they would be. They provided the excuse the American fascists were looking for to further their own plans without much push back.
I think it delayed the inevitable. By the 90s, right wing American extremism was on the rise. 9/11 put up a facade of unity (as long as you didn’t look middle eastern). The right wing movements went quiet for 15 years. America returned to trajectory in 2016.
I’d argue neoconservativism started with WW2, but neoliberalism is probably better tied to Nixon. So I agree, 9/11 was just a continuation of neocon power grabs, but invoking post-WW2 “capitalism” doesn’t make much sense to me; the New Deal was comparatively great for workers. Neoconservativism isn’t really an economic movement like neoliberalism is.