Pudliner 1

Ryan Pudliner

CAS 137H

Professor Lori Bedell

8 November 2022

9/11: An Ideological Shift for American Culture

What would society be like if 9/11 never happened? How would citizens view

themselves? Would air transportation be like it is today? On September 11, 2001, members of

the terrorist group al-Qaeda hijacked four commercial planes. The hijacked planes plummeted

into the Twin Towers in New York City, the Pentagon, and Shanksville Pennsylvania. The total

death count from the attacks is recorded as 2,996. 9/11 created a shockwave that reverberated

throughout day-to-day actions, policies, and emotions of the American people, shifting American

ideology permanently. Before 9/11, society within the United States was entirely different. For

example, people were unafraid for their personal safety and were unconcerned about surveillance

by the United States government. Furthermore, airport security was not as robust. Following the

attack, people developed a xenophobia towards Muslims, airport security became much more

stringent, and many defense bills were passed. Overall, the sudden attack on September 11,

2001, shifted the dominant ideology of American invincibility, triggering unprecedented

governmental and societal implications.

Prior to 9/11, having the strongest military in the world and geographic isolation, the

United States remained under the impression that they were invincible. According to a Gallop

poll, prior to the attack on 9/11, only 24% of people were worried that someone in their family

would become a victim of terrorism. Following the attack, 58% of people became worried. This
 Pudliner 2

shows that prior to the attack, terrorism was not as great of a public safety concern; however,

9/11 shifted many individuals’ points of view, resulting in the ideology of invincibility to

become disbanded indefinitely.

Social Implications

Within the United States, 9/11 clearly was not a “normal” attack. Instead, it was an

infringement on the very ideals that the United States was founded on, instilling trauma on

civilians. For example, in an interview with Elizabeth Nolan, financial worker on Wall Street,

CNN states that “[Elizabeth] scans for exits everywhere she goes and avoids large crowds and

high-rise buildings. Now, [Elizabeth] has PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) and has been

fighting for 20 years to reclaim her life.” In other words, an individual who was near the site of

where 9/11 took place has been permanently scarred by the horrific disaster that occurred on that

day. Furthermore, as stated by Schuster et al. in “Searching for and finding meaning in collective

trauma: Results from a national longitudinal study of the 9/11 terrorist attacks,” half of

Americans reported symptoms of post-traumatic stress, with symptoms lasting weeks or months

(709). While work environments, college, and public speaking instill fear in an individual, none

of those experiences result in long term mental damage. The trauma that occurred within the

minds of American citizens the day of 9/11 was to such a high degree that individual actions

began to fluctuate from their traditional belief. Following 9/11, xenophobia toward the Muslim

population and the clash of government legislation contributed to the disbandment of an ideology

of invincibility. Subsequently, recruitment into the armed forces skyrocketed.

 Pudliner 3

With the disbandment of the ideology of invincibility, the attack on 9/11 provoked

xenophobia toward the Muslim population. The attack that was carried out on 9/11 was carried

out by members of Al Qaeda, all of whom being Muslim. Consequently, American citizens

began acting violently towards this ethnic group. As a result, Muslim heritage individuals began

to experience day-to-day persecution. For instance, airline passengers with the perceived

ethnicity of Arabic were illegally removed from major U.S. airlines due to either crew members’

or passengers’ discomfort (Morgan et al., 448). This illustrates that American citizens developed

a negative stigma, and concrete / negative actions were taken on Muslim-heritage individuals.

Eventually, the actions towards Arabic looking people also became more violent. As cited in The

expulsion from Disneyland: The social psychological impact of 9/11, Ibish states that “more than

700 acts of violence that targeted Arab Americans or those perceived to be Arab were

documented in the first nine months following 9/11, a dramatic increase of the fewer than 10

incidents reported from 1998 to 2001” (448). This shows the immense influx of hateful actions

towards people of Muslim descent. Also, this proves that Americans developed the impression

that most, if not all, Arabic descent individuals were a threat to the safety of the United States,

causing many to take actions into their own hands using violence and prejudice actions. In

conclusion, by Americans losing the ideology of invincibility after 9/11, a belief of hatred

towards Arabic individuals was established. As a result, Muslim individuals were personally

affected by being presented with actions of violence and prejudice.

The dissolve of the ideology of invincibility by American citizens following 9/11

provoked an increase in enlisted personnel in the Armed Services. While 9/11 came as a shock to

some, many joined the military to have an impact on national security and reduce the threat of

terrorism plummeting the world (and in this case the United States), into disarray. Consequently,
 Pudliner 4

from 2001-2002 enlisted military personnel increased by 3.26%, maintaining its status as the

highest increase in one year since 9/11 (“U.S. Military Size 1985-2022"). The significant influx

of people joining the armed services illustrates the dramatic change in the public’s point of view

of international security before and after such an attack. In fact, many individuals who joined the

military following the attack never previously considered such a career path; however, the fear of

international threats embodied a dramatic life change for many people. For example, Army

Major Tatchie Manso states prior to the events that took place on 9/11, he never considered

joining the military and instead was pursuing a collegiate degree; however, following the attack,

he states that “‘It was at that moment I realized that there was something I needed to be part of

that was greater than myself”’ (DeSimone). For an individual to dramatically change his/her

behavior, there must be an ideological shift. Army Major Manso demonstrates the ideological

shift that occurred following 9/11 by immensely changing the trajectory of his career path.

Rather than finishing his collegiate degree, inadvertently avoiding the military, the fear of future

terroristic threats compelled him to join the military.

Governmental Actions

Prior to 9/11, American civilians did not foresee terrorists having the capability to attack

the United States internally. According to Bruce Hoffman, he states that “What we thought of

Bin Laden before 9/11- Most importantly, the United States was perhaps lulled into believing

that mass, simultaneous attacks in general and those of such devastating potential as seen in New

York and Washington on September 11 were likely beyond the capabilities of most terrorists—

including those directly connected to, or associated with, Usama bin Laden” (305). This proves

that the United States did not believe terrorists (such as the ones responsible for 9/11), posed a

threat to citizens of the United States. After such a great misjudgment by the United States, the
 Pudliner 5

government conceived various acts including the following: The Aviation and Security Act,

Homeland Security Act of 2002, and the Patriot Act. While the overarching purpose of such acts

was to respond to a broken ideology of invincibility, privacy concerns arose.

In response to a broken ideology of invincibility, Congress passed the Aviation and

Transportation Security Act, creating the Transportation Security Administration. Prior to the

attack on 9/11, transportation security was limited with the intention of deterring and detecting

criminal activity (Johnstone, 52). Furthermore, individual airlines hired private security firms to

manage security screening at each gate. With security firms competing with one another, firms

decreased their price by maintaining low labor costs resulting in poor airline security (Roots

504). This shows that prior to the attack on 9/11, airport/airplane security was not a major focus.

Nevertheless, by becoming instilled with fear after 9/11, the public feared another attack on

airplanes, deterring people from flying. To address such concerns, Congress had no choice but to

act. From an excerpt out of a 2001 New York Times article, it states that “law makers set aside

their disagreements today, in an effort to restore public confidence in the safety of air travel, by

passing the Aviation and Security Act” (Pear 2). The divided nature between both republican and

democratic congresspeople, each with their own agendas, poses an incredible problem to

unanimously agree on a policy/particular topic; however, both parties understood the urgency to

restore trust in air security. Furthermore, the lack of the ideology of invincibility became the

driving force to pass such a significant bill with ease. Under normal circumstances, such a bill

would have faced conflict. For example, Pew Research Center concluded that in 2004 (three

years after 9/11), over a quarter of the democratic party sees the Republican party as a threat to

the nation’s wellbeing, causing deadlocks when passing bills that involve more than the majority.
 Pudliner 6

In summary, losing the ideology of invincibility within the United States overpowered the

division in Congress, paving the way for the Aviation and Transportation Security Act.

To react to a disbanded ideology of invincibility, Congress passed the Homeland Security

Act of 2002, founding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to combat terroristic threats

within the borders of the United States of America. Prior to the creation of the DHS, government

agencies lacked efficiency to combat terrorism due to a lack of transparency between agencies;

however, organization of government agencies was much different after 9/11. According to

Melvin A. Goodman, the implementation of the Department of Homeland Security can be

thought of as a “network-federalist national security strategy.” In other words, the Department of

Homeland Security created a network between government agencies, allowing for the transfer of

resources between such agencies, allowing for a more efficient process to evaluate internal and

international threats. When the Department of Homeland Security was passed, Congress

purposefully chose “prevent terroristic attacks within the United States” as the first primary

mission of the Department (Homeland Security Act of 2002), revealing the urgency that the

United States government possessed in responding to the terroristic threat on 9/11. In addition,

such a logical approach demonstrated to the public that security against terror is the number one

priority of the United States, reassuring its citizens.

In response to the panic and fear of 9/11, the Patriot Act was passed unanimously in

Congress, with a split of 98-1 in the Senate and 357-66 in Congress. (H.R.3162 - Uniting and

Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct

Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001). The unilateral behavior of such a bill, stems from

the need for Congress to give an immediate response to the events that occurred, combating the

loss of invincibility throughout the country. Overall, the intention of such an act is “to deter and
 Pudliner 7

punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement

investigatory tools, and for other purposes” (H.R.3162 - Uniting and Strengthening America by

Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT

ACT) Act of 2001). In other words, the Patriot Act gives the United States government access to

a range of increased surveillance on American citizens, in hopes of preventing a future attack

like that on 9/11. The aggressive moves by a mostly united Congress reveal the dissolved

ideology that individuals did not know how to react to. Although the Patriot Act provided

counterterrorism measures, it raised many public implications.

Some claim that the Patriot Act acted as a bill that violated the Constitutional rights of

citizens. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, they state that “Section 215 [of the

Patriot Act] violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing the government to search and seize your

personal records or belongings without a warrant and without showing probable cause.” This

shows the clash between government and public opinions following the attack on 9/11. From the

government’s perspective, they believe that terrorism can be prevented through internal spying.

On the other hand, civilians claim that a violation of a Constitutional right supersedes

preventative measures against terrorism. Overall, the divide between governmental and public

opinions is caused from individual response to the abolishment of the ideology of invincibility

after 9/11.

While individuals wanting to give up their right to privacy for an increase in national

security was appropriate immediately following 9/11, opposition of the Patriot Act by citizens

further proves the ideological shift in America. Initially after the attack, 55% of people thought it

was necessary to give up civil liberties to reduce the likelihood of terrorism; however, the

percentage of people decreased from 55% to 40% in 2011 (Doherty). The spike of people willing
 Pudliner 8

to give up civil liberties stems from the initial fright 9/11 caused for many individuals, regressing

down to lower percentages since then. In short, 9/11 disbanded people’s ideology of invincibility

and the immediate impacts on personal safety, eventually leveling off following the attack.

Conclusion

In conclusion, 9/11 disbanded the dominant ideology of invincibility within the United

States. As a result, many social and governmental implications occurred. From a social

perspective, individuals showed signs of PTSD, xenophobia toward Arabic-heritage individuals,

and military enlistment rose. Governmentally, Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation

Security Act, the Department of Homeland Security Act of 2002, and the Patriot Act, producing

a separation of thought between the government and the public. The disbandment of invincibility

is monumental to United States history because it has shifted everyday life. Currently, people

still suffer from the trauma that they experienced on that day, scared of large crowds and

personal security. In addition, rather than saying goodbye to loved ones at airport terminals, non-

flying individuals are not allowed to pass airport security. Finally, government surveillance has

become a predominant debate for several decades. At its time, 9/11 served as a wakeup call for

Americans that they are not invincible from international threats. Now, the United States serves

as a precedence to the world in terms of national security, all of which never would have been

possible without 9/11.

 Pudliner 9

Works Cited

American Civil Liberties Union. "The Patriot Act Gives the FBI Unchecked Power to Spy on

Ordinary Citizens." Are Privacy Rights Being Violated? edited by Stuart A. Kallen,

Greenhaven Press, 2006. At Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010365214/OVIC?u=psucic&sid=bookmark

-OVIC&xid=c20fb79f.

Carroll, Joseph. “Americans' Terrorism Worries Five Years after 9/11.” Gallup.com, Gallup, 11

Apr. 2021, news.gallup.com/poll/24412/americans-terrorism-worries-five-years-after-

911.aspx.

“Civil Liberties and Security: 20 Years after 9/11 - AP-NORC.” AP, 10 Sept. 2021,

apnorc.org/projects/civil-liberties-and-security-20-years-after-9-11/.

DeSimone, Danielle. “Why 9/11 Inspired These Service Members to Join the Military.” United

Service Organizations, The USO, 7 Sept. 2021, www.uso.org/stories/2849-why-9-11-

inspired-these-patriots-to-join-the-military.

Doherty, Carroll. “Balancing Act: National Security and Civil Liberties in Post-9/11 Era.” Pew

Research Center, Pew Research Center, 27 Sept. 2021,

www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/07/balancing-act-national-security-and-civil-

liberties-in-post-911-era/.
 Pudliner 10

"Enhancing the Organization of the United States Department of Homeland Security to Account

for National Risk." Homeland Security Affairs, vol. XVI, 2020. ProQuest,

ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww

.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fenhancing-organization-united-states-department

%2Fdocview%2F2522295241%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D13158.

Geiger, Abigail. “Political Polarization in the American Public.” Pew Research Center - U.S.

Politics & Policy, Pew Research Center, 9 Apr. 2021,

www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/.

Hoffman, Bruce. “Rethinking Terrorism and Counterterrorism since 9/11.” Studies in Conflict &

Terrorism, vol. 25, no. 5, 2002, pp. 303–316., doi:10.1080/105761002901223.

Homeland Security Act of 2002, vol. 148, 2002. Department of Homeland Security Congress,

www.dhs.gov/homeland-security-act-2002.

H.R.3162 - Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to

Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001, vol. 147, 2001.

Congress.gov Congress, www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/3162?q=%7B

%22search%22%3A%5B%22The+Patriot+Act+2001%22%2C%22The%22%2C

%22Patriot%22%2C%22Act%22%2C%222001%22%5D%7D&s=6&r=45.

Johnstone, R. W. "Not Safe enough: Fixing Transportation Security." Issues in Science and

Technology, vol. 23, no. 2, 2007, pp. 51-60. ProQuest, ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?

qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fnot-safe
 Pudliner 11

-enough-fixing-transportation-security%2Fdocview%2F195926709%2Fse-2%3Faccountid

%3D13158.

Morgan, G. S., Daniel C. Wisneski, and Linda J. Skitka. "The Expulsion from Disneyland: The

Social Psychological Impact of 9/11." American Psychologist, vol. 66, no. 6, 2011, pp. 447-

454. ProQuest, ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww

.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fexpulsion-disneyland-social-psychological-impact

%2Fdocview%2F882618201%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D13158,

doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024772.

Nolan, Elizabeth. “It's Been 20 Years since 9/11. Here's How Lives Were Forever Changed.”

CNN, Cable News Network, 2021, www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/09/us/life-after-9-11-

attacks-anniversary/#elizabeth.

Pear, Robert. "CONGRESS AGREES TO U.S. TAKEOVER FOR AIR SECURITY: 28,000

WILL BE TRAINED TO SCREEN PASSENGERS AND ALL BAGGAGE THE

LEGISLATION CONGRESS ACTS ON TAKEOVER OF AIRPORT SECURITY BY U.S.

HIGHLIGHTS; AN AGREEMENT ON SECURITY OF AIR TRAVEL." New York Times

(1923-), Nov 16, 2001, pp. 2. ProQuest, ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?qurl=https%3A

%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fhistorical-newspapers%2Fcongress-agrees-u-s-takeover-

air-security%2Fdocview%2F91832845%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D13158.

Roots, Roger. “Terrorized into Absurdity: The Creation of the Transportation Security

Administration.” The Independent Review, vol. 7, no. 4, 2003, pp. 503–17. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/24562556.
 Pudliner 12

Updegraff, John A., Roxane C. Silver, and E. A. Holman. "Searching for and Finding Meaning

in Collective Trauma: Results from a National Longitudinal Study of the 9/11 Terrorist

Attacks." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 95, no. 3, 2008, pp. 709-722.

ProQuest, ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww

.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fsearching-finding-meaning-collective-trauma

%2Fdocview%2F614492638%2Fse-2, doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.709.

“U.S. Military Size 1985-2022.” MacroTrends, www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-

states/military-army-size.