BEg2 ch30 paragraph 6

[Hübschräuber]

Am 01.06.2022 um 09:01 schrieb Michael Bailey:

> Some militarization occurring, and while the tone isn’t evincing or
> recommending a “thrilled about it” attitude, it doesn’t seem to me to be
> either surprised or greatly disapproving - except of the bus loads of
> racially profiled arrestees, and I’m reading that into it mostly, based on
> the previous paragraph and the reference to “civic imagination.”
>
> A Mobile Command Center near a tense locality doesn’t seem like a terrible
> idea, does it?

No, but...

I keep reading BE against the background of VL and its explicit,
thematic references to REX 84 and COINTELPRO, i.e. Continuity of
Government and counterinsurgency measures.

As CoG features in BE just like it did in VL, I again point to
the fact that CoG or Continuity of Operations measures were implemented on September 11. To the best of my knowledge they have
not been rescinded. The specifics are, of course, classified:

"The George W. Bush administration put the Continuity of Operations plan
into effect for the first time directly following the September 11 attacks."

"On July 18, 2007, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), a member of the U.S. House
Committee on Homeland Security at that time, requested the classified
and more detailed version of the government's continuity-of-operations
plan in a letter signed by him and the chairperson of the House Homeland
Security Committee, which is supposed to have access to confidential
government information.

The president refused to provide the information, to the surprise of the
congressional committee. As of August 2007, efforts by the committee to
secure a copy of the plan continued."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuity_of_Operations_Plan#Continuity_of_Operations_plan_activated

(We might remember that Oliver North testified about REX 84 only in closed
session.)

Perhaps more to the point, I read this passage specifically against the background of the Patriot Act which looms in
the near future of the narrative present:

"The Patriot Act was enacted following the September 11 attacks and the
2001 anthrax attacks with the stated goal of dramatically tightening
U.S. national security, particularly as it related to foreign terrorism.
In general, the act included three main provisions:

- expanded surveillance abilities of law enforcement, including by
tapping domestic and international phones;
- easier interagency communication to allow federal agencies to
more effectively use all available resources in counterterrorism
efforts; and
- increased penalties for terrorism crimes and an expanded list of
activities which would qualify for terrorism charges.

The law is controversial due to its authorization of indefinite
detention without trial of immigrants, and due to the permission given
to law enforcement to search property and records without a warrant,
consent, or knowledge."

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

This, I suggest, is the general political/historical background Pynchon evokes (this is, looking into the future of the narrative present - looking
into the past we get DARPA, the RAND corporation, McCarthyism from
Ernie, as well as the Cold War Command and Control Centre in the Dark Web).

In the passage at hand, Pynchon describes the subtle implementation of a
permanent state of emergency - or at least steps taken into that
direction: Detention and imprisonment without charges, surveillance, roadblocks, the military patrolling the
streets. These measures may be seen as reasonable under the circumstances but it is well known that once civil rights are curtailed they hardly ever are reinstituted once the immediate danger is over. Relatedly, like the whole concept of national security, the measures are of dual use as instruments of counterterrorism as well as of counterinsurgency.

In any case, Pynchon seems to emphasise
the fact that those "Mobile Police Command Centers" became permanent
features.

I like it how seamlessly the material from this
context, which may be termed "parapolitical", "deep political" or simply
"pertaining to the machinations of the national security state", blends
in with the observational and indeed, as you say, not "surprised or
greatly disapproving" tone of the passage. At the very least, however,
the dangers of the counterterrorist paradigm are hinted at - not in the
text at hand, but if one takes the historical context and Pynchon's various takes on the
national security state into account.

The door of the mouse trap in Maxine's dream closes "not that loudly"...