The oracle foretold the hurricane, the people did not listen, and they could not communicate when it arrived...
Reinventing 911
By Gary Wolf Wired
12/2005
Bread Roses & The Flood
By Eric Foner
The Nation
10/03/2005
Levee Town
By Alexander Cockburn
The Nation
10/03/2005
Intelligible Design
By Kathy Pollitt
The Nation
10/03/2005
Why the Hurricane Plan Got Trashed
By Peter Schwartz
Wired
11/2005
Gary Wolf, in his examination of ways in which the entire 911 system is (or could be) changing, examines the Hurricane Katrina situation from a scientific point of view. This is something that anyone who’s angry or disturbed about the hurricane should read, because it covers more than the politics and the lack of manpower into the poorer areas of New Orleans – it covers an entire communication system that went down (from the ground up as well as the top down), and several scientific warnings and what-if scenarios supplied to the city…several of which proved to be prophetic, point for point.
There are some very good points made about the insurance game weighing out the costs of prevention over the costs of post-disaster payment, as well as the simply no-longer-applicable-or-workable system of centralized and rigidly structured warning systems.
There are new systems and new ideas, some of which have been very successfully implemented in California (as earthquake prevention as well as day-to-day public safety) and none of it require new technology or billions of dollars in research. It’s a just a new way of handling communication by basing it on the idea that more people and organizations need to have immediate access to potential (and current) dangers. Organizations like schools, hospitals, the security divisions of large high-rises, and even people with cells phones and pagers who request emailed updates on anything happening in their area.
The perspective presented by the Wired article, is that the majority of the problems faced by Katrina could have been prevented through implementation of suggestions from scientists before the event occurred, and greatly helped by a simple and wide spread network of communication that would have informed most, if not all, of the citizens of New Orleans of what was about to happen (or was happening).
Scientifically speaking, it didn’t have to happen, and it could be easily avoided in the future.
Scientifically speaking, the government’s method of addressing potential terrorist attacks through increased secrecy and rigidly structured control is not only not effective, it sets us up for significant damage, should the attacks actually occur. The only safety is a safety in numbers, and that means letting the people in on what’s going on – everything that’s going on.
Peter Schwartz (Why the Hurricane Plan Got Trashed), looks at the disaster from another scientific view – the near prophetic research from scientists who have been presenting reports and warnings since the 1960s. Work that was blatantly ignored and undermined by political structures focused on short-term thinking. Bottom line, there was no one in a position of power who did not have access to information telling them exactly (point for point) what was going to happen, and none of them chose to act on the information.
The political points of view, expressed in the articles from The Nation, are focused on 1) the government’s poor handling of the situation before and after, 2) the fact that poor people were the one’s who were hit hard (non-whites who were middle to upper class got away just like the rest of the people in their income bracket), 3) the reconstruction of New Orleans will involve the take over of large quantities of land previously called home by the city’s poorest residents, as the plans for new low-income housing places those people on the outskirts of the city (conveniently falling in line with city plans and objectives that have been in place for a very long time), 4) the poor is New Orleans are a necessary low-wage source of workers, but no one wants to actually have to see them, and 5) now that the world has seen the horrors of the tragedy, and is aware of just how desperate in New Orleans are, things will begin to change.
Some of this makes sense, and some of it doesn’t.
Foner (Bread, Roses, and the Flood) compares Katrina to the Lawrence, MA strike of 1912, where the march of under-nourished, poorly clothed, and heartbreakingly poor children out of the city (in preparation for the strike, the kids were sent to live elsewhere for the duration of the negotiations), caused the public and government officials to stand up and take notice. Once the children were seen, the concerns of their families could no longer be ignored. The problem with this argument is the fact that we are not living in the world of 1912. Commercials, media, and even advertising campaigns (ever stop into a Starbucks take a look at the photos of the workers who grow the beans that make their coffee?) present similar, and sometimes worse, images every day. All of those adopt-a-child campaigns with emaciated children whose eyes and nose are covered in flies have been come both hum-drum and the source of jokes. While there are plenty of people who are related to the people in New Orleans, and the event is directly connected to our own government, it’s going to fade from the public eye (and the public memory) rather quickly. The changes that need to be made, and the issues that have been raised, in New Orleans are not going to be made during the course of a 2-3 month media blitz. And, our government officials (and the businesses that work with them) have gotten very good at making promises, and then taking actions that only seem to follow through on the promises made. The world is more complicated and more jaded than the world of 1912, and sad pictures just aren’t going to cut it.
Alexander Cockburn (Levee Town) makes a good point for the convenient nature of the hurricane to any and all developers who are looking for the opportunity to take over lands previously covered in housing owned by the poor. In his words: “The scarcely suppressed class war in New Orleans was what gave the place, and its music, its edge. And why, at least until now, the Disneyfication of the core city could never quite be consummated.” Now the city and the developers and the tourist trade kings can take over New Orleans and turn it into a year-round Marti Gras with a sterilized version of the music the city’s known for and the places it can be heard played. So, was this a planned mistake, or just happy coincidence for the ones in charge of the money and the power?
Katha Pollitt (Intelligible Design) takes the disaster and broadens the scope of the state of the nation that Katrina illustrates. She touches on education, birth control, religious fanaticism, the loss of jobs to cheaper-wages in other countries, abortion and single mothers, and the attempts on the part of government to remove itself from the business of government through excessive privatization and pandering to the wealthy elite. The country was headed for a disaster; Katrina was that disaster, now where are we headed from here?
The hurricane, like most natural disasters, was heartbreaking and full of pointing fingers. The reason it happened was up to nature (or, if you prefer, God), but the reaction was up to us. ‘Us’ is often interpreted as the government we pay for in taxes and loss of personal freedom, and there’s always a lot of time spent on ‘you were supposed to’ commentary from people concerned about things people in power really don’t spend much time on…unless, of course, it’s an election year.
I was once told a story by a professor (during my undergraduate years) that described a community that had decided to make a decision. The incidence of fetal alcohol syndrome was dangerously high, so the community had discussions and then announced to all living within the borders of their area that pregnant women will not drink – period. We can’t control what you do outside of our area, but when you’re here, you will not drink. For whatever reason, government officials came in and took the community to court based on the idea that they were violating a woman’s right to privacy. The community didn’t bother to show up to court and the government won their case. However, if you were living in that community, and you were pregnant, you did not drink. Those were the house rules – like it or leave. Fetal alcohol syndrome in that community dropped significantly and, therefore, the rules struck…government be damned.
That story has stuck with me since the day I heard it. Government is only as useful, or as powerful, as we chose to make it. Sometimes it’s safer, and more effective, to simply identify your community’s needs and address them directly…government be damned.
In this age of technology (and the relatively easy access to it) it would be merely a matter of logistics to create a people-created and people-run 911 system - a warning network more elaborate and more affective than the old phone tree idea, but similar to it in spirit.
In fact, I rather think that there are a lot of things that people rely on the government, and big business, for that could be done away with (or supplemented in case of emergency) through a little ingenuity and networking. Finances are always an issue, granted, but if something is needed badly enough, and a community recognizes the need (and the fact that they are going to have to take care of themselves if they ever want it done), there are ways around that.
The one thing that I have taken from the Katrina disaster is that it’s a dangerous thing to view your government as a safety net or a friendly ‘uncle.’ There are thousands upon thousands of communities in this country, making us a patchwork of needs, ideas, beliefs, and objectives. If each community would truly focus on the bare necessities and the needs of its people from the perspective of a worst-case scenario (read: What do we need to survive? How will we know when serious danger is afoot? How will we handle losing all services from governments and companies?), and then taking a good hard look at their immediate communities and making simple changes (in housing, in communication, in resources, in back up generators, etc), it would not only reduce the affects of disaster upon their community, it would reduce the power of government over their lives.
Of course, this is the kind of action that must come from within a community – not something that should be mandated (or financed or managed) by government. It’s not so much a suggestion for a new way to handle and govern things, as it is a recognition of the dact that we all have more power than we think we have, and taking some of that under our own control can be a good thing.
While it is important to always work for change, to never stop questioning government, and to never let them off the hook for not supplying the services they are there to supply; it’s equally important to be realistic about the bare-necessity needs of your community, and how they will be addressed should the cavalry never arrive.
By Gary Wolf Wired
12/2005
Bread Roses & The Flood
By Eric Foner
The Nation
10/03/2005
Levee Town
By Alexander Cockburn
The Nation
10/03/2005
Intelligible Design
By Kathy Pollitt
The Nation
10/03/2005
Why the Hurricane Plan Got Trashed
By Peter Schwartz
Wired
11/2005
Gary Wolf, in his examination of ways in which the entire 911 system is (or could be) changing, examines the Hurricane Katrina situation from a scientific point of view. This is something that anyone who’s angry or disturbed about the hurricane should read, because it covers more than the politics and the lack of manpower into the poorer areas of New Orleans – it covers an entire communication system that went down (from the ground up as well as the top down), and several scientific warnings and what-if scenarios supplied to the city…several of which proved to be prophetic, point for point.
There are some very good points made about the insurance game weighing out the costs of prevention over the costs of post-disaster payment, as well as the simply no-longer-applicable-or-workable system of centralized and rigidly structured warning systems.
There are new systems and new ideas, some of which have been very successfully implemented in California (as earthquake prevention as well as day-to-day public safety) and none of it require new technology or billions of dollars in research. It’s a just a new way of handling communication by basing it on the idea that more people and organizations need to have immediate access to potential (and current) dangers. Organizations like schools, hospitals, the security divisions of large high-rises, and even people with cells phones and pagers who request emailed updates on anything happening in their area.
The perspective presented by the Wired article, is that the majority of the problems faced by Katrina could have been prevented through implementation of suggestions from scientists before the event occurred, and greatly helped by a simple and wide spread network of communication that would have informed most, if not all, of the citizens of New Orleans of what was about to happen (or was happening).
Scientifically speaking, it didn’t have to happen, and it could be easily avoided in the future.
Scientifically speaking, the government’s method of addressing potential terrorist attacks through increased secrecy and rigidly structured control is not only not effective, it sets us up for significant damage, should the attacks actually occur. The only safety is a safety in numbers, and that means letting the people in on what’s going on – everything that’s going on.
Peter Schwartz (Why the Hurricane Plan Got Trashed), looks at the disaster from another scientific view – the near prophetic research from scientists who have been presenting reports and warnings since the 1960s. Work that was blatantly ignored and undermined by political structures focused on short-term thinking. Bottom line, there was no one in a position of power who did not have access to information telling them exactly (point for point) what was going to happen, and none of them chose to act on the information.
The political points of view, expressed in the articles from The Nation, are focused on 1) the government’s poor handling of the situation before and after, 2) the fact that poor people were the one’s who were hit hard (non-whites who were middle to upper class got away just like the rest of the people in their income bracket), 3) the reconstruction of New Orleans will involve the take over of large quantities of land previously called home by the city’s poorest residents, as the plans for new low-income housing places those people on the outskirts of the city (conveniently falling in line with city plans and objectives that have been in place for a very long time), 4) the poor is New Orleans are a necessary low-wage source of workers, but no one wants to actually have to see them, and 5) now that the world has seen the horrors of the tragedy, and is aware of just how desperate in New Orleans are, things will begin to change.
Some of this makes sense, and some of it doesn’t.
Foner (Bread, Roses, and the Flood) compares Katrina to the Lawrence, MA strike of 1912, where the march of under-nourished, poorly clothed, and heartbreakingly poor children out of the city (in preparation for the strike, the kids were sent to live elsewhere for the duration of the negotiations), caused the public and government officials to stand up and take notice. Once the children were seen, the concerns of their families could no longer be ignored. The problem with this argument is the fact that we are not living in the world of 1912. Commercials, media, and even advertising campaigns (ever stop into a Starbucks take a look at the photos of the workers who grow the beans that make their coffee?) present similar, and sometimes worse, images every day. All of those adopt-a-child campaigns with emaciated children whose eyes and nose are covered in flies have been come both hum-drum and the source of jokes. While there are plenty of people who are related to the people in New Orleans, and the event is directly connected to our own government, it’s going to fade from the public eye (and the public memory) rather quickly. The changes that need to be made, and the issues that have been raised, in New Orleans are not going to be made during the course of a 2-3 month media blitz. And, our government officials (and the businesses that work with them) have gotten very good at making promises, and then taking actions that only seem to follow through on the promises made. The world is more complicated and more jaded than the world of 1912, and sad pictures just aren’t going to cut it.
Alexander Cockburn (Levee Town) makes a good point for the convenient nature of the hurricane to any and all developers who are looking for the opportunity to take over lands previously covered in housing owned by the poor. In his words: “The scarcely suppressed class war in New Orleans was what gave the place, and its music, its edge. And why, at least until now, the Disneyfication of the core city could never quite be consummated.” Now the city and the developers and the tourist trade kings can take over New Orleans and turn it into a year-round Marti Gras with a sterilized version of the music the city’s known for and the places it can be heard played. So, was this a planned mistake, or just happy coincidence for the ones in charge of the money and the power?
Katha Pollitt (Intelligible Design) takes the disaster and broadens the scope of the state of the nation that Katrina illustrates. She touches on education, birth control, religious fanaticism, the loss of jobs to cheaper-wages in other countries, abortion and single mothers, and the attempts on the part of government to remove itself from the business of government through excessive privatization and pandering to the wealthy elite. The country was headed for a disaster; Katrina was that disaster, now where are we headed from here?
The hurricane, like most natural disasters, was heartbreaking and full of pointing fingers. The reason it happened was up to nature (or, if you prefer, God), but the reaction was up to us. ‘Us’ is often interpreted as the government we pay for in taxes and loss of personal freedom, and there’s always a lot of time spent on ‘you were supposed to’ commentary from people concerned about things people in power really don’t spend much time on…unless, of course, it’s an election year.
I was once told a story by a professor (during my undergraduate years) that described a community that had decided to make a decision. The incidence of fetal alcohol syndrome was dangerously high, so the community had discussions and then announced to all living within the borders of their area that pregnant women will not drink – period. We can’t control what you do outside of our area, but when you’re here, you will not drink. For whatever reason, government officials came in and took the community to court based on the idea that they were violating a woman’s right to privacy. The community didn’t bother to show up to court and the government won their case. However, if you were living in that community, and you were pregnant, you did not drink. Those were the house rules – like it or leave. Fetal alcohol syndrome in that community dropped significantly and, therefore, the rules struck…government be damned.
That story has stuck with me since the day I heard it. Government is only as useful, or as powerful, as we chose to make it. Sometimes it’s safer, and more effective, to simply identify your community’s needs and address them directly…government be damned.
In this age of technology (and the relatively easy access to it) it would be merely a matter of logistics to create a people-created and people-run 911 system - a warning network more elaborate and more affective than the old phone tree idea, but similar to it in spirit.
In fact, I rather think that there are a lot of things that people rely on the government, and big business, for that could be done away with (or supplemented in case of emergency) through a little ingenuity and networking. Finances are always an issue, granted, but if something is needed badly enough, and a community recognizes the need (and the fact that they are going to have to take care of themselves if they ever want it done), there are ways around that.
The one thing that I have taken from the Katrina disaster is that it’s a dangerous thing to view your government as a safety net or a friendly ‘uncle.’ There are thousands upon thousands of communities in this country, making us a patchwork of needs, ideas, beliefs, and objectives. If each community would truly focus on the bare necessities and the needs of its people from the perspective of a worst-case scenario (read: What do we need to survive? How will we know when serious danger is afoot? How will we handle losing all services from governments and companies?), and then taking a good hard look at their immediate communities and making simple changes (in housing, in communication, in resources, in back up generators, etc), it would not only reduce the affects of disaster upon their community, it would reduce the power of government over their lives.
Of course, this is the kind of action that must come from within a community – not something that should be mandated (or financed or managed) by government. It’s not so much a suggestion for a new way to handle and govern things, as it is a recognition of the dact that we all have more power than we think we have, and taking some of that under our own control can be a good thing.
While it is important to always work for change, to never stop questioning government, and to never let them off the hook for not supplying the services they are there to supply; it’s equally important to be realistic about the bare-necessity needs of your community, and how they will be addressed should the cavalry never arrive.
posted by A at 8:06 AM
<< Home