![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
altarielI wasn't going to post about Katrina and its aftermath, but a sociologist has presented himself as a target for my repressed ire. I don't mind taking my impotence and frustration out on sociologists. Frank Furedi's piece on the BBC website attempts a deconstruction of a "master narrative" of the events which primarily seeks to point blame, and he suggests such an account is counter-productive. Furedi argues that in "today's secular times" (?), we no longer primarily use descriptions such as "act of God" or "act of Nature" to explain natural disasters (although I have certainly read a couple of pernicious accounts on these lines over the past week).
I think any comprehensive reading of events includes "Fucking Great Hurricane" as one of the primary causes. But I don't think that's a sufficient explanation - scratch a bit and you will usually find some good old social causes behind "acts of God" or "acts of nature". I am trying to be careful in this post to distinguish hurricane and aftermath. Because a hurricane can rip up a city by its roots, but it seems to take laissez-faire, chronically structural poverty, availability of guns, and the negligence of people in positions of responsibility to turn a convention centre into Dante's fucking Inferno. Social factors. We make our own hells. If the apparatus of modern, technologically-advanced society - a defining feature of which is the capacity to organize on a large scale - is not used primarily for the protection and care of the people who constitute society, and to alleviate misery and distress whenever it can, we may as well go back to banging the rocks together guys. And I'm yet to see evidence that this apparatus was used in this way.
Furedi concludes: "Today, the meaning of a catastrophe, like the one unleashed by Hurricane Katrina, is fiercely contested. There is no one moral story that we are all prepared to accept. That means we are in danger of facing a double disaster. One that is about physical destruction and loss of life, and the other which is the legacy of bitterness, confusion and suspicion. Instead of a powerful story that we can learn from there is a risk that we will become disoriented by an obsession to blame."
That last sentence contains a couple of interesting narrative moves. Firstly, it begins transforming the process of investigating responsibility in this terrible series of events into "an obsession to blame". Secondly, upon this, a false binary is constructed according to which, it seems, we may either blame or learn. Since Furedi is interested in the sociology of dissident knowledge, I'll use an online source to counter him:
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
hederahelix's recent post gives us the tools to recognize and deconstruct such a false binary, and refuse it as the conclusion of a narrative. I am perfectly capable of both learning and judging, sometimes all at the same time, and I think many other people are too. I've read variations on the theme of "hey, let's not point the finger" around the net and this one has persuaded least. Damn right people are looking for someone to blame. Not God, not Nature... it's almost like people want to hold those responsible for the chaos that came with Katrina accountable. Told that way, it's almost like progress.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 05:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 06:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 07:05 pm (UTC)*stands up and applauds*
Yes and yes and yes. There are some kinds of academic fatalism which, translated properly out of the jargon in which they are couched, translate into "we can't do everything, and therefore we should do nothing, and people who believe otherwise are quaint." Faugh.
According the the Red Cross's web site, someone in the government (they did not say who) decided that the Red Cross should not be allowed to go into the Superdome and the convention center, because if the Red Cross were in New Orleans, that would encourage people to stay in the city. This decision cost lives. It was not an act of God. It was not an act of nature. It was an act of criminal negligence, and whoever did it belongs in jail.
By studying such failures, too, we don't just cast blame, we establish a record of practices that work and practices that don't, so we can better tackle the problem next time. Gah. It's amazing that this kind of thing even needs to be said.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 07:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 07:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 08:12 pm (UTC)The government response to the approaching Hurricane was to say. "Ya'all better get out." This worked for the vast majority of the city of New Orleans, black and white. Those who stayed behind were those who were poor, disabled, or elderly, and of course the "Gs", ie gangs of black thugs. They are the people Hollywood rap artists pretend to be, except there is no part of the ghetto where everyone drives Bentlys and Ferraris, and black supermodels dance in the street, while these thugs flash their gold jewelry. It is more like the Black Hole of Calcutta every day, and the Gs rule the roost.
Once the police were unable to keep the peace, the Gs ran wild. There were forces available to keep the peace, but they were not used. Each state is a mini country, and Governor has a small army, called the National Guard, for just such an emergency. They were not called to duty. There are also the state police. All totalled, the Governor had 7000 Guardsmen, and 1000 State Police, who were not sent in. At the Superdome, they had a token force of a few soldiers, who were not even carrying rifles when I saw them on TV during the admittance process before the storm. A few companies of men would have made a huge difference there. An emergency generator, and truckload of porta potties would have helped as well. There was no planning to deal with the situation, it was all last minute when the Mayor discovered that thousands of poor people had not left. The city owns over 1000 school busses, plus the regular public transport busses. They were not used to evacuate theose who were unable to leave. Once everyone got in the Superdome, the Gs took over. They over powered the few guardsmen there and killed them. After that it turned into a horror show. I heard reports that they roamed the crowd, just took the women they liked, hauled them off, and they were never seen again. They stole everything of value from everyone, and beat people severly for entertainment. 2 companies of armed soldiers (400) would have prevented this. A handful could not. The governor gave the lame excuse that their heavy trucks were in Iraq. Somehow CNN & Fox news was able to brodcast from right outside the dome, and had power, food, and water. The Guardsmen all own cars, and many own large 4 wheel drive pickup trucks. They could have been ordered to drive to New Orleans and walked in. They are soldiers, they know how to get places by marching.
Basically, the Governor and Mayor spent their time going on TV and denouncing the Federal Government for not doing anything, while ignoring their responsibility to hold the fort until the Feds arrive.
Continued in next post...
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 08:13 pm (UTC)Yes, you can point fingers and assign blame. You can say that government that is totally corrupt, and in the pocket of the gambling "industry", is likely useless in an emergency. You can say that if you cultivate a popular culture that glorifies violent street gangs as cultural icons, and tolerates their existence, they are going to cause trouble at the worst possible time.
You also have to give credit where credit is due. When the US military finally was able to move in, things turned around fast. They would have been there sooner, but the Governor was too busy doing TV interviews to sign the legal documents required to allow the Feds to take over the situation.
I could go on like this for a few hours. I think I made my point.
mk
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 08:18 pm (UTC)Too right some of us are looking to apply blame. We're looking to apply blame where it rightfully belongs, because this is *not* just a natural disaster whose outcome could not have been changed in any way, and assigning blame in a few places where it rightfully belongs could mean a few less dead people next time round. Because there will be a next time, and a time after that.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 08:18 pm (UTC)...I think if there is one thing to be taken away from this entire tragic debacle, it is this: Do What The Nice Scientists Tell You, They Are Not Making It Up.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 08:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 09:51 pm (UTC)I was watching a documentary about the Nottinghill riots yesterday, and one man from Jamaica talked about being chased into a grocer's by an angry mob. And he said he'd been through disasters before, he'd been in a hurricane. But, he said, 'it is different. In a hurricane, you're not alone, you know?' I think the people in New Orleans are dealing with both types of disaster (random and man-made) at the same time, and *that* is what makes it so dog eat dog.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 01:40 am (UTC)The attempts currently ongoing to shift blame from the Bush administration to lower levels of government are just bullshit.
Let's not even bother with detailing how Bush corrupted FEMA, turning a professionally-staffed agency into a cronyism machine, how military assets sat unused for want of orders from the Commander in Chief, or how FEMA actively impeded aid efforts. Just read this piece by Larry Johnson.
Here's the crucial section, from the National Response Plan 2004:
Protocols for proactive Federal response are most likely to be implemented for catastrophic events involving chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive weapons of mass destruction, or large magnitude earthquakes or other natural or technological disasters in or near heavily populated areas.
All the bureaucratic excuses you're hearing are just the squealing of criminally incompetent politicians desperate to deflect the blame from themselves. Oh, I'm sure when the final reckoning is done there will be inadequacies found in the actions of local politicians as well. Whether they are judged to have responded adequately or not is a judgement the people of New Orleans and Louisiana will have to make. But the whole point of federal emergency management is that extreme events overwhelm the limited resources of local areas.
Besides, you don't, personally, have to worry too much about whether the Governor of Louisiana or the Mayor of New Orleans did a bang-up job. After all, if a natural disaster or major terrorist attack hits your locality, they won't have anything to do with whether or not you live or die. The President, the Department of Homeland Security, and FEMA, may one day be critical to your survival. Does the sorry tale of New Orleans not make you concerned for your personal safety? I mean, if this is the best they can do with plenty of notice (and 4 years after 9/11), what happens if a bunch of nutters manage to set off a crude nuclear weapon with no warning, ten miles upwind of your house?
*sigh*
Date: 2005-09-07 02:04 am (UTC)Thank you for contributing to the deflation of one rather pathetic attempt to mystify the Katrina aftermath out of the realm of political debate.
Dwim
Edited re-posting
Date: 2005-09-07 03:16 am (UTC)As an aside, I thought you'd find this article, interesting.
That article was written in 2001. How prophetic.
Sorry if you've read it before.
I'm still stunned that the government of the United States of America, the richest country in the world, couldn't or wouldn't find the resources to rescue its own citizens from peril.
Aside over.
Re: Edited re-posting
Date: 2005-09-07 04:02 am (UTC)You seem to be operating on the assumption that the government is supposed to protect the public good. Not a safe assumption to make right now.
The current administration is, at the very least, libertarian in its commitments--if it could immediately cut the entire social safety net without suffering the political consequences of so obvious a move, I don't think there'd be any hesitation. As it is, efforts to privatize social security, the downsizing of FEMA, the EPA's downward spiral, etc., are clearly efforts in that direction.
Grover Norquist said in 2001 that he wanted government cut to the point that he could drown it in a bathtub. Forgive me for thinking that he just got his bathtub--he just needs to go to New Orleans and claim it.
Dwim
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 06:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 06:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 09:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 10:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 10:02 am (UTC)I don't think that's correct:
There are many, many stories like this. I think I understand why no infrastructure was in place to receive the evacuees.Part of that is just poor contingency planning. But even so, it would have worked out OK if the federal government had responded to the catastrophe in a timely fashion. I have a feeling that's what the local authorities were banking on.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 10:10 am (UTC)Which seems to imply both federal and local/state failures.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 01:44 pm (UTC)The emergency was declared before the hurricane got there. The mayor of New Orleans waited until the last day to evacuate the city, and didn't lift a finger to move the poor out in busses he had. The governor didn't move the national guard in to position. The police failed to maintain order. Armed looter attacked rescuers, and beseiged shelters. The city's levees failed. The ocal government had not done adaquate hurricane planning, despite knowing that they would get hit by a large one a few times a century. None of this is FEMA's, or any other part of the Federal governments fault. It was a total breakdown of civil governance in Louisiana, caused by inept, corrupt leadership. That state has been run by the Democrats since about 1830, and we are now seeing an attempt by the Democrat Party and their puppets in the press to shift the blame.
FEMA did a good job in the hurricanes last year. The people who do the work are the same ones who have always been there. They didn't suddenly just turn to fools.
If there is a major disaster in my state, it is the local police and firemen who will respond first, followed by the state National Guard. By the time the Feds get there, it will all be over except the cleanup. I assume it will go about as well as can be expected. I am sure it well go better than it did in Louisiana, because our state is not riddled with generational corruption, and led by totally inept stooges.
This is response just the latest chapter in the Left's permanent snit over Bush winning the election. The Democrats have been walking around with their eyes popped out on springs for the last 5 years. This is just the same old same old. According to the Democrats and their propaganda agency, known as the US press corps, everything Bush does is criminal, everyone should be fired, and not one thing that has been done in the last five years has been done well, or even with good intentions. The attacks started before the hurricane got here. They were totally predictable, and as usual, the Left has nothing constructive to contribute to solving the problems at hand. If you want to see how well the Democrats would have handled the situation, just look at Louisiana.
mk
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 04:54 pm (UTC)Re: Edited re-posting
Date: 2005-09-07 06:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 08:18 pm (UTC)Re: *sigh*
Date: 2005-09-07 08:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 08:26 pm (UTC)I wish I could get to the bottom of this. The Department of Homeland Security in Louisiana seem significant, but how the federal and state responsibilities pan out, I'm not clear.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-08 12:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-08 04:30 pm (UTC)Why there was no food or water delivered to people in New Orleans
Date: 2005-09-08 05:03 pm (UTC)Note; The National Guard and state Homeland Security Department are both under the control of the Governor of Louisiana. The Federal government did not take over the situation until the Governor allowed them to, several days after the disaster began. As soon as the situation was Federalized, things started to get better; people were fed and moved out, order was restored. The fiasco in New Orleans had nothing to do with FEMA, and everything to do with the ineptitude of the local authorities.
http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1096,0_682_4524,00.html
# Acess to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.
# The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.
# The Red Cross has been meeting the needs of thousands of New Orleans residents in some 90 shelters throughout the state of Louisiana and elsewhere since before landfall. All told, the Red Cross is today operating 149 shelters for almost 93,000 residents.
# The Red Cross shares the nation’s anguish over the worsening situation inside the city. We will continue to work under the direction of the military, state and local authorities and to focus all our efforts on our lifesaving mission of feeding and sheltering.
# The Red Cross does not conduct search and rescue operations. We are an organization of civilian volunteers and cannot get relief aid into any location until the local authorities say it is safe and provide us with security and access.
# The original plan was to evacuate all the residents of New Orleans to safe places outside the city. With the hurricane bearing down, the city government decided to open a shelter of last resort in the Superdome downtown. We applaud this decision and believe it saved a significant number of lives.
# As the remaining people are evacuated from New Orleans, the most appropriate role for the Red Cross is to provide a safe place for people to stay and to see that their emergency needs are met. We are fully staffed and equipped to handle these individuals once they are evacuated.
Re: Why there was no food or water delivered to people in New Orleans
Date: 2005-09-08 05:13 pm (UTC)Note; The National Guard and state Homeland Security Department are both under the control of the Governor of Louisiana.
This is the thing that I'm trying to get to grips with, since I thought Homeland Security was Federal government?
no subject
Date: 2005-09-08 05:42 pm (UTC)Apparently, Louisiana has their own as well. It seems that the first response to any disaster in the US is to start a new government agency, or at least rearrange the ones we have and rename it. After 9/11, everyone was worried about terrorism, so the politicians felt the need appear to to be doing something about it. Starting new agencies to solve all our problems is how they usually respond. I am not sure if Wisconsin opened its own Homeland Security Administration. ... I just looked at my State's web site, and sure enough, we have one too! I feel safer already. Now I am sure a hurricane will never hit Wisconsin.
One thing foreigners have a hard time grasping about the US is that the States are very nearly independent countries with a common currency. Most everything we do is governed by the State, not the Feds. The Feds were legally unable to take over the operations in Louisiana until the Governor allowed them to. The President would have had to declare martial law to override State control.
mk
State-federal stuff
Date: 2005-09-09 01:59 am (UTC)http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/arng-la.htm
More specifically:
The primary statutes governing the activation of the National Guard fall under Title 10 and Title 32 of the U.S. Code. Guardsmen are called up to active duty under Title 10 for national service in missions funded by the federal government. They serve under the command of the National Command Authority (the President and Secretary of Defense) and receive all of the rights and benefits of active national service. Guard units activated for Title 32 missions, on the other hand, come under the command of the state governor. Additionally, Section 502(f) of Title 32 allows the National Guard to be called up for federal service while remaining under the control of the governor. These missions are funded by the federal government but, depending on the type of activation, may or may not receive many of the benefits of national service.
From http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/BG1532.cfm
The Heritage Foundation, which I quote while holding my nose.
Here is what happens when a federal disaster is declared and how it must proceed after a request and briefing from the state level:
http://www.fema.gov/rrr/dec_guid.shtm
And Wiki comes through with a fairly simple definition of a state of federal emergency (note the extensive powers granted the federal government in these instances, if the emergency is declared on that level--which it was for Katrina as of August 28. Still not sure whether that means the federal level could order National Guard troops into the area or if that would require a national emergency precipitated by an attack so as to come under title 10 funding and control). Both local, state, and federal levels had declared New Orleans (and other areas) to be in a state of emergency before the hurricane arrived:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_emergency#The_United_States
So if you're confused about who is responsible for what, join the line of probably most of us in the United States because this sort of thing isn't what you learn in class and it's not really discussed in public forums until something awful happens.
This next is a useful article that goes through and documents to the extent possible at the time the delay in National Guard deployment and also talks about the fact that the NG can be commanded in different situations on either a state or federal level:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5253757,00.html
This gets a WTF? from me, and I wonder if we'll have to wait six months to find out why the delay occurred.
But even more interesting, to my mind, are these:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/katrina/story/0,16441,1562882,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html
Hmmmmmm. The state-federal relations there just fill me with confidence should anything happen in my state.
Dwim
Re: State-federal stuff
Date: 2005-09-14 11:50 am (UTC)Re: State-federal stuff
Date: 2005-09-14 04:12 pm (UTC)...to assist that jackass Bush on his merry misadventures to bring a bit of Ole South justice to them po’ folk an’ Niggas.
I'm not so eloquent these days. So forgive the forward nature of that.
It's good and necessary to work through tracking where the relief efforts failed--where the current responses fell through, leading to the nightmarish misery and tragically unnecessary death down there.
But we are fooling ourselves when we don't also look at how this could have been prevented to begin with and Bush was begged for the extra funding to continue proper maintenance of the levies in 2000. And as I understand it…instead of granting the extra funds, he cut their current budget down to a dangerous level. The engineering corps that were keeping the levies maintenanced have been warning Bush and his administration for 5 years that this was a charnel house waiting to happen if he did not repeal the funding cuts. Bush knew this would happen with the next big storm, and he knew when it did the people impacted would be the poor and predominantly minority populations down there. It was nothing short of malicious, premeditated ethnic cleansing.
Hope(Who feels comfortable accusing a man of murder who had five years of warning about this probability.)