Alan Brinkley discusses the uncertainty at the moment in which we are currently living: the uncertainty as to what happened and uncertainty as to what the future will hold. Real Video 12:32

Eric Foner warns that in the wake of the attacks self-censorship is a danger as some Americans may conceal their true views for fear of being labeled unpatriotic and that the use of war metaphors by the media and the government may obfuscate to the public's understanding of events. Real Video 19:26

Ira Katznelson criticizes the premature conclusions and instant analysis of experts, arguing too little is known about the terrorists' motivations. Real Video 19:26

Anthony Marx reflects on whether the events of September 11 are a historic turning point and whether history has pivoted in a dramatic way, suggesting that memory of it will fall somewhere between Pearl Harbor and President John Kennedy's assassination in terms of historical impact. Real Video 19:26

While daily news accounts have asserted the historical impact of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Columbia history professor Alan Brinkley urged caution in describing their place in history.

"Uncertainty is at the heart of the moment in which we are living," Brinkley said during an Oct. 5 forum sponsored by Columbia's Center for Historical Social Sciences. "This may represent a great rupture in the fabric of history, but we won't know for a time. My guess is our memory of it will fall somewhere between Pearl Harbor and the JFK assassination in terms of historical impact."

However, Brinkley added, the September 11 attacks will undoubtedly alter the American mindset.

"We'll move forward into a future with the notion in the corner of our mind that things can dramatically change in the blink of an eye," Brinkley concluded.

Also participating were history professor Eric Foner and political science and history

professor Ira Katznelson. The roundtable was moderated by Columbia professors Karen Barkey and Anthony Marx, co-directors of the Center for the Historical Social Sciences.

Foner said it is unlikely civil liberties would be rolled back in the wake of the attacks because "civil liberties are much more deeply ingrained in our culture than in the past."

However, he added, "there is a danger of self-censorship," under which Americans conceal their true views for fear of being labeled unpatriotic.

Foner, an expert on the Civil War, slavery and 19th century America, also took issue with the term " War on Terrorism."

" 'War on Terrorism,' is somewhat is somewhat suspect as a term," said Foner. "War metaphors are dangerous because they eliminate areas of gray."

Katznelson derided those who have drawn premature conclusions about the causes of the attacks, arguing that too little is known about the terrorists' motivations to offer such analyses.

"There simply is no precedent for terror with a capital T that literally leaves no word—no statement of instrumental goals or demands, no declared ideology," said Katznelson, who is currently examining the relationship between cities and the elements of liberalism, such as rights, political representation and religious tolerance. "This is terror not beyond reason, for reasoning can take many forms, or beyond purpose, for purposeful the behavior certainly was, but beyond language. It is this articulate silence that mocks the instant analyses of 'experts' who know for sure that it is poverty or imperialism or the failures of Oslo or the post-Gulf war sanctions regime that caused a particular act on a particular day in a particular place. Are we really so confident we can impute agency from symbols alone?"

Katznelson also argued that the September 11 attacks will, in the coming decades, challenge the rights and institutions embodied by liberalism.

"Ahead lies liberalism's most basic current challenge: how to broaden its capacities to protect and nourish heterogeneity while coping with its perils," he concluded. "This was the challenge John Locke faced in 1689. Our version of this challenge presently beckons. It is not a 'war on terrorism' that will define the early 21st century, but a series of battles for the soul—that is for the doctrines, institutions and practices—of political liberalism inside a more inclusive and global as well as a more dark version of Enlightenment. We had better make this struggle our first priority."