Re: MD Katrina - Thousands Dead ?

From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sat Sep 03 2005 - 15:41:19 BST

  • Next message: mark maxwell: "Re: MD Katrina - Thousands Dead ?"

    Hi all,

    Thanks to Sam for the link speaking of the "Social Capital"
    difference between the US and Cuba. Here's an essay by Michael
    Parenti which pushes the point even further, examining a totally
    ignored element of the New Orleans disaster.

    - - - - - - -

    How the Free Market Killed New Orleans

    By Michael Parenti

    The free market played a crucial role in the destruction of New
    Orleans and the death of thousands of its residents. Armed with
    advanced warning that a momentous (force 5) hurricane was going to
    hit that city and surrounding areas, what did officials do? They
    played the free market.

    They announced that everyone should evacuate. Everyone was expected
    to devise their own way out of the disaster area by private means,
    just as the free market dictates, just like people do when disaster
    hits free-market Third World countries.

    It is a beautiful thing this free market in which every individual
    pursues his or her own personal interests and thereby effects an
    optimal outcome for the entire society. This is the way the invisible
    hand works its wonders.

    There would be none of the collectivistic regimented evacuation as
    occurred in Cuba. When an especially powerful hurricane hit that
    island last year, the Castro government, abetted by neighborhood
    citizen committees and local Communist party cadres, evacuated 1.3
    million people, more than 10 percent of the country's population,
    with not a single life lost, a heartening feat that went largely
    unmentioned in the U.S. press.

    On Day One of the disaster caused by Hurricane Katrina, it was
    already clear that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of American lives had
    been lost in New Orleans. Many people had "refused" to evacuate,
    media reporters explained, because they were just plain "stubborn."

    It was not until Day Three that the relatively affluent telecasters
    began to realize that tens of thousands of people had failed to flee
    because they had nowhere to go and no means of getting there. With
    hardly any cash at hand or no motor vehicle to call their own, they
    had to sit tight and hope for the best. In the end, the free market
    did not work so well for them.

    Many of these people were low-income African Americans, along with
    fewer numbers of poor whites. It should be remembered that most of
    them had jobs before Katrina's lethal visit. That's what most poor
    people do in this country: they work, usually quite hard at dismally
    paying jobs, sometimes more than one job at a time. They are poor not
    because they're lazy but because they have a hard time surviving on
    poverty wages while burdened by high prices, high rents, and
    regressive taxes.

    The free market played a role in other ways. Bush's agenda is to cut
    government services to the bone and make people rely on the private
    sector for the things they might need. So he sliced $71.2 million
    from the budget of the New Orleans Corps of Engineers, a 44 percent
    reduction. Plans to fortify New Orleans levees and upgrade the
    system of pumping out water had to be shelved.

    Bush took to the airways and said that no one could have foreseen
    this disaster. Just another lie tumbling from his lips. All sorts of
    people had been predicting disaster for New Orleans, pointing to the
    need to strengthen the levees and the pumps, and fortify the
    coastlands.

    In their campaign to starve out the public sector, the Bushite
    reactionaries also allowed developers to drain vast areas of
    wetlands. Again, that old invisible hand of the free market would
    take care of things. The developers, pursuing their own private
    profit, would devise outcomes that would benefit us all.

    But wetlands served as a natural absorbent and barrier between New
    Orleans and the storms riding in from across the sea. And for some
    years now, the wetlands have been disappearing at a frightening pace
    on the Gulf' coast. All this was of no concern to the reactionaries
    in the White House.

    As for the rescue operation, the free-marketeers like to say that
    relief to the more unfortunate among us should be left to private
    charity. It was a favorite preachment of President Ronald Reagan that
    "private charity can do the job." And for the first few days that
    indeed seemed to be the policy with the disaster caused by Hurricane
    Katrina.

    The federal government was nowhere in sight but the Red Cross went
    into action. Its message: "Don't send food or blankets; send money."
    Meanwhile Pat Robertson and the Christian Broadcasting Network---
    taking a moment off from God's work of pushing John Roberts
    nomination to the Supreme Court---called for donations and announced
    "Operation Blessing" which consisted of a highly-publicized but
    totally inadequate shipment of canned goods and bibles.

    By Day Three even the myopic media began to realize the immense
    failure of the rescue operation. People were dying because relief
    had not arrived. The authorities seemed more concerned with the
    looting than with rescuing people. It was property before people,
    just like the free marketeers always want.

    But questions arose that the free market did not seem capable of
    answering: Who was in charge of the rescue operation? Why so few
    helicopters and just a scattering of Coast Guard rescuers? Why did it
    take helicopters five hours to get six people out of one hospital?
    When would the rescue operation gather some steam? Where were the
    feds? The state troopers? The National Guard? Where were the buses
    and trucks? the shelters and portable toilets? The medical supplies
    and water?

    Where was Homeland Security? What has Homeland Security done with the
    $33.8 billions allocated to it in fiscal 2005? Even ABC-TV evening
    news (September 1, 2005) quoted local officials as saying that "the
    federal government's response has been a national disgrace."

    In a moment of delicious (and perhaps mischievous) irony, offers of
    foreign aid were tendered by France, Germany and several other
    nations. Russia offered to send two plane loads of food and other
    materials for the victims. Predictably, all these proposals were
    quickly refused by the White House. America the Beautiful and
    Powerful, America the Supreme Rescuer and World Leader, America the
    Purveyor of Global Prosperity could not accept foreign aid from
    others. That would be a most deflating and insulting role reversal.
    Were the French looking for another punch in the nose?

    Besides, to have accepted foreign aid would have been to admit the
    truth---that the Bushite reactionaries had neither the desire nor the
    decency to provide for ordinary citizens, not even those in the most
    extreme straits. Next thing you know, people would start thinking
    that George W. Bush was really nothing more than a fulltime agent of
    Corporate America.

    * * * * * END PARENTI

    Best to all,
    Mark Steven Heyman (msh)

    -- 
    InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
    Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
    Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
    On 2 Sep 2005 at 17:33, Sam Norton wrote:
    less than 2 months ago, cuba was able to move 1.7 million people on
    short notice. the whole civil defense is embedded in the community to
    begin with. people know ahead of time where they are to go. they come
    to your door and knock, and tell you, evacuation is coming, then they
    come and tell you, now. if no electricity, they have runners who
    communicate from a headquarters to central locations what is to be
    done. the country's leaders go on TV and take charge. but not only 
    the leaders are speaking. the TV weatherpeople are knowledgeable. and 
    the population is well educated about hurricanes. they not only 
    evacuate. it's arranged beforehand where they will go, who has family 
    where. not only pickup is organized, delivery of people is organized. 
    merely sticking them in a stadium is unthinkable. shelters all have 
    medical personnel, from the neighborhood. they have family doctors in 
    cuba (!), who evacuate together with the neighborhood, and already 
    know who, for example, needs insulin. if they evacuate to a 
    countryside high school -- a last resort -- they have dormitories 
    there. they also have veterinarians and they evacuate animals. they 
    begin evacuating immediately, and also evacuate TV sets and 
    refrigerators, so that people aren't relucatant to leave because 
    people might steal their stuff. it's not throwing money at the 
    problem. it's not financial capital, it's social capital. the u.s. in 
    this sense has zero social capital. dealing with hurricanes in cuba, 
    as compared with how it's done in the u.s., is similar to the 
    differences in how they deal with medicine. it's not reactive; it's 
    proactive. they act as early as possible. the u.s. doesn't have civil 
    defense, it has civil *reaction.*
    MOQ.ORG  - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward  - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 03 2005 - 16:28:20 BST