Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

After the Deluge

September 6, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

By now, you may have have read and watched, and wept and yelled, quite enough on the topic of Hurrican Katrina and its aftermath -- and in that case, probably, can take no more. If so, please come back on Thursday, when Intellectual Affairs will begin its weekly coverage of new books.

My plan had been to devote today's column to Astra Taylor's Zizek!, due to be  be screened during the Toronto International Film Festival (September 8-17). It's a smart and wry film, and worthy of the attention -- but given the other images I've had to process over the last week, this does not seem like the moment. And Taylor herself agrees, so we'll count on revisiting Zizek!

But for now, a brief roundup of some recent, or otherwise pertinent, discussions of Katrina. This survey won't try to be exhaustive. If you've come across something brilliant, provocative, profoundly chowderheaded, etc. that ought to have been linked here -- well, please use the comments section to let the world know.

For a good selection of commentary from around the world, by all means start out with the digest   prepared by the staff of Open Democracy. And as ever, Alfredo Perez provides a running log of recent articles at Political Theory Daily Review, where for now the coverage of Katrina is linked in the middle column, "Town Square." No doubt more and more essays will be appear in the "Ivory Tower" section in the months ahead.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that our president is not a hard-reading man. The difficult of imagining him with a book is integral to the aura of wholesome folksiness, otherwise so difficult to project for a millionaire Yalie scion of the WASP establishment. No one can seriously doubt that he is telling the non-reality-based truth (as he sees it) in stating that it was impossible to anticipate the impact of Katrina.

And yet, and yet.... An astonishing account of the destruction of New Orleans by a hurricane appeared in National Geographic -- last October. We're not talking about some boring old memo, either! It's National Geographic, people, the magazine with the bright and vivid pictures. Surely someone in a position of responsibility might have shown him that?

He might also have benefitted from a look at Chris Mooney's article at the Web site of The American Prospect from late May. But that is probably pushing it.

"In a parliamentary democracy," as Henry Farrell wrote over the weekend, "George W. Bush would almost certainly either have resigned by now or be on the point of resigning." The point has not been lost even on the likes of David Brooks -- in normal circumstances, one of the G.O.P.'s reliably feisty attack poodles (to borrow the expression coined by James Wolcott.

Urging us to keep things in perspective, though, we have Niall Ferguson,  the most celebrated historian of (and in) that globalizing project known as the growth of Empire. On Sunday, he reminded us that the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 was pretty awful, too, and that the tendency back then was to attach moral significance to natural disaster. Now, a quarter millennium later, that temptation is being indulged again -- but by a motley crew of leftists, environmentalists, and those opposed to the Iraq war, all of them looking for scapegoats. (Also, the jihadists, who are glad to think of the boost in oil prices.)

It is difficult to take the measure of such chutzpah. Not so long ago, Ferguson was the most serious, and certainly the most prominent, contemporary champion of counterfactual history: that is, the use of the alternative scenarios as a took for thinking about the possible outcomes of events. ("What if Hitler had been killed in 1918?" etc.) The strongest claim for the value of counterfactual history is that it undercuts determinism -- which, in turn, makes us more aware of possibility, of decision-making, of individual responsibility.

Well, how's this for an exercise in the counterfactual rewriting of history? Suppose that most members of the National Guard were, you know, inside the national borders. Imagine that there were old copies of National Geographic on Air Force One. Daydream about accountability.

Of course, there are other ways of looking at the situation. For example, the case of New Orleans could be revisted from a strictly free-market perspective -- as proof of the failure that naturally follows from obliging the government to take on responsibilities better left to private initiative.

"So who should own the public levees?" asks Will Baude, of the Federalist Society at Yale Law School. "The standard analysis certainly labels them as the classic domain of the government, and if we can design an institution that can do an effective job, I am all for it. But I do think there are structural reasons to suppose that we might be able to come up with alternative, perhaps non-governmental, institutions that would do a better job of holding back le deluge�?

Worse even than the creeping socialism of public utilities is the moral rot that we have seen manifested in the streets, according to Robert Tracinski. "What Hurricane Katrina exposed," he writes, "was the psychological consequences of the welfare state.... People with values respond to a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to overcome the difficulties they face. They don't sit around and complain that the government hasn't taken care of them. And they don't use the chaos of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men."

Clearly not! The solution is obvious. Somebody needs to get the collected works of Ayn Rand down to New Orleans right away, preferably in a waterproof edition.

On the future of New Orleans, check out comments by Randall Parker at Parapundit, David Sucher at City Comforts and Nathaniel Robinson at Cliopatria.

It seems a matter of time before there is a large body of analysis concerning how race and class have been addressed (or ignored) in the wake of Katrina. But so far, not so good. An exception has been Rachel Sullivan's two-parter ( here and here ) followed by her quick list of some relevant information on social inequality. But things have been relatively quiet, so far, on the H-Net African-American Studies list.

Then again, my eyes are now rather blurry.... If you've come across anything having major consequences for how we should understand the past week -- or the future it has opened -- then please share that information in the space below.

UPDATE: How could I have overlooked the page of links at the History News Network? Well worth a look.

Scott McLemee writes Intellectual Affairs on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Suggestions and ideas for future columns are welcome.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on After the Deluge

  • PROPHETIC
  • Posted by SP on September 6, 2005 at 8:53am EDT
  • It is rare that academic geographers flip the pages of the National Geographic, but the 2004 article referred to above is prophetic. The conclusion reads
    "For all its enticing quirkiness, for all its licentious pleasures, for all its geologic challenges, New Orleans has been luckier than the wetlands that lined its pockets and stocked its renowned tables. The question is how long Lady Luck will shine. It brings back something Joe Suhayda, the LSU engineer, had said during our lunch by Lake Pontchartrain. "When you look at the broadest perspective, short-term advantages can be gained by exploiting the environment. But in the long term you're going to pay for it. Just like you can spend three days drinking in New Orleans and it'll be fun. But sooner or later you're going to pay." I finish my beignet and stroll down the levee, succumbing to the hazy, lazy feel of the city that care forgot, but that nature will not."

    It didn't. Having just started research on the victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami in Sri Lanka, similarities emerge. Removal of wetlands offering coastal protection. No viable plan to deal with mass emergency, and insufficient funding for warnings. A belief that nothing bad will happen. Government and agencies wrangling about responsibilities and in SL, accusations that the imposition of a coastal buffer strip will later be used to provide coastal land for elites and corporate fat cats (chances of another big tsunami hitting the coast are actually low). 8 months after the wave, many homeless remain in temporary shelters while aid is locked up - accusations of ethnic favoritism in rebuilding efforts, shocking bureaucratic hurdles put in place (eg no aid given to families without proper papers - which were washed away)...the list goes on.
    The US emergency need not and will not take this course, but it certainly highlights that a) nature is capricious, and more of a threat to god-fearing citizens as wayward fundamentalists and suicide bombers (and killing far more people) b) cautious Republican mantras about providing 'security' to Americans needs to extend this to natural hazard preparedness, and this includes the thorn in the administration's side, the US's large contribution to sea level rise; c) studying the relations between environment and society is no longer a backwater of geography and environmental anthropology - combined with aggressive environmental regulation, it might start providing some answers and solutions (see for example, At Risk, B Wisner et al, Routledge, 2004), and the RADIX webpage, University of Northumbria.

  • Moralizing Disaster
  • Posted by AL on September 6, 2005 at 9:56am EDT
  • How surprising that McLemee considers the "motley crew of leftists, environmentalists, and those opposed to the Iraq war" to be the moralizers of disaster. How about the right-wing Christian fanantics and abortion opponents who have declared the hurricane to be divine retribution on Louisiana for having too many abortion clinics, and on New Orleans for hosting a gay ball? Why single out the left?

  • Predictable disasters - SFO, S. Fla., Ocracoke, et al
  • Posted by Bob A on September 6, 2005 at 10:19am EDT
  • Of course, NOLA is a tragedy, with plenty of blame to go around, at the local, state, and federal levels. Why wasn't martial law declared ASAP to allow more medical helicopters to fly? Why are all those NOLA school buses under water, instead of out of town with living passengers? Why has FEMA lost so many senior staffers recently?

    After living in the hurricane zone (N.C.) and with friends in a 'quake zone (SFO) -- one becomes somewhat resigned to fate. If you like to walk by the water -- that water may bite some day. If you like to ride cable cars on steep hillsides -- you may have to walk UP those steep hillsides some day.

    And life goes on, no matter what -- it has to. So, be prepared, as the Scouts say. Your fate is in your hands -- waiting for outside help might take too long.

  • Posted by Chip Beckett on September 6, 2005 at 11:49am EDT
  • Dear AL,

    Please re-read, with an eye out for Irony.

  • Hurricane Katrina
  • Posted by Ellen Heltzel at Book Babes on September 6, 2005 at 12:26pm EDT
  • Scott,
    Pointy-heads aside, it seems from this distance (Oregon) that culpability falls into two categories, before and aft. FEMA gets the blame for the slow response to the disaster, but where were local officials with a plan to tend to the unusually high (we now learn) numbers of disabled and poor in New Orleans? A friend tells me that the Jewish Federation swooped in and evacuated a Jewish nursing home before the disaster, and she wondered why like institutions -- the churches et al -- weren't marshalling the same kinds of efforts for their constituents. The federal government's big housing projects and monthly checks are no substitute for a more personal connection and the social glue that binds the strong to the weak. It's only partly mollifying that we see this outreach now, in the wake of the storm. The breakdown identified in the book "Bowling Alone" -- assisted by the widening disparity in income and outlook between the "two Americas" -- set the stage for a situation -- and a shame --that brings to mind James Agee and "Let Us Now Praise Famous Men."

  • response to AL
  • Posted by Scott McLemee , columnist at Inside Higher Ed on September 6, 2005 at 1:27pm EDT
  • It is astounding to think that you could read this column and conclude that I agree with Niall Ferguson's ploy of lumping leftists, environmentalists, and jihadists into one motley crew of moralists. This seems almost willful.

    For the record -- and lest any tender-minded soul be confused, the following will is intended without even the slightest irony), my outlook is as sternly lefto-moralistic as AL could want, or Ferguson could fear. As in, my wife is tired of hearing my rant in favor of the death penalty for corporate criminals.

    Astounding. Just astounding.....If you dare to put your tongue in your cheek, someone is bound to hit you over the head and make you regret it.

  • Fact check?
  • Posted by jem on September 6, 2005 at 1:36pm EDT
  • Scott McLemee writes:

    "Suppose that most members of the National Guard were, you know, inside the national borders."

    We don't have to suppose, because thy are.

    There are just under 330,000 in the Army National Guard. Just under 80,000 of them are deployed overseas (around 60,000 in Iraq, the rest split between Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia, and the Sinai).

    There are about 12,000 troops in the Louisiana Army National Guard. Around 3,000 of them are still deployed overseas -- all in Iraq, I believe, with 2,500 of them due back quite soon.

    It's DOD policy that no state will have more than half its guard deployed on federal missions overseas at one time, and it looks like they've stuck to it.

    Indeed, plenty went wrong in the initial response to Katrina, and there's no doubt that having 3,000 more guardsmen to call on would have made some difference -- but I doubt it would have made enough of a difference to dramatically change the pictures we've been seeing.

  • Men and Fate
  • Posted by normalvision , Prof. of English (ret.) on September 6, 2005 at 3:16pm EDT
  • One poster wrote of being resigned to fate.

    It might be worth considering these words from the great master realist Nicolo Machiavelli. In this passage from Chapter XXV of The Prince he urges men to understand that they can (and should) affect the course of "the affairs of the world":
    I compare her [Dame Fortune] to one of those raging rivers, which when in flood overflows the plains, sweeping away trees and buildings, bearing away the soil from place to place; everything flies before it, all yield to its violence, without being able in any way to withstand it; and yet, though its nature be such, it does not follow therefore that men, when the weather becomes fair, shall not make provision, both with defences and barriers, in such a manner that, rising again, the waters may pass away by canal, and their force be neither so unrestrained nor so dangerous.
    Translated by W. K. Marriott
    -------------------
    We could also turn the analogy around: Men should prepare in advance to affect the affairs of nature as they would prepare actions to affect the "the affairs of the world."

  • So .. we should abandon SFO?
  • Posted by Bob A. on September 6, 2005 at 4:04pm EDT
  • "We could also turn the analogy around: Men should prepare in advance to affect the affairs of nature .."

    My 1996 hurricane experience: driving rains, lightening, green-black sky, 90 MPH winds, cowering under my desk. Near-death experience. My reward for working late and not thinking ahead.

    I'm at a loss, to determine what kind of planning by humans could deflect that kind of destructive power.

    You live in the hurricane zone/tornado alley/whatever, -- don't deny the risks. Mother Nature will remind you, regularly.

    And rebuilding -- and more rebuilding -- will not remove those risks. It is, what it is -- nature.

  • PIggy Lesson
  • Posted by normalvisin on September 6, 2005 at 7:30pm EDT
  • Well, Bob A., there are ways to plan for the attacks of nature. Like the third little piggy, who built his house of bricks, not straw or sticks, society can take measures against the huffing of wolves or the puffing of hurricanes. But as Machiavelli noted, men are too easily lulled into complacency (no need to do anything; the sun is shining). Of course, we cannot eliminate hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, but we can mitigate some of the consequences of nature by having the will to face the issue while the sun shines and building with more substantial bricks than with cut-rate straw or sticks.

  • Response
  • Posted by Kevin , Undergraduate on September 6, 2005 at 7:31pm EDT
  • While the response to the hurricane was inadequate, the vulnerablity of the city was well know.

    Like much of California and earthquakes, some people are quite determined to live in areas that are disaster threatened, come hell or high water.

    Unfortunately, this time the high water was quite literal. Some of these people didn't leave despite the warnings because they didn't want to spend the money (and yes, even the poor can afford a bus ticket to somewhere north of city limits). Others are just used to false alarms. Others are just stubborn - note that some of them have had to be dragged quite literally kicking and screaming out of their homes or those of others - and some have turned to firing weapons at the police and National guardsmen.

    I wonder if anyone is paying any more attention to the California quake predictions now. I doubt it. How about the Hawaii tsunami warnings? The Alaska earthquake warnings? New Orleans is still built below sea level, and people are still talking about the city coming back bigger and better than ever.

    While federal, state and local authorities all revealed themselves to be inadequately prepared, they don't bear the blame for the disaster in New Orleans. They responded as best they could, and that didn't turn out to be nearly good enough.

  • Bricks wouldn't help, buddy
  • Posted by Bob A. on September 6, 2005 at 10:34pm EDT
  • ".. Of course, we cannot eliminate hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, but we can mitigate some of the consequences of nature by having the will .."

    This brand-new "hurricane-resistant" facility ..

    http://www.hardrockcafe.com/locations/cafes/comingsoon.aspx?lc=BILO

    was supposed to open this week. A $235 million, 306-room hotel-casino was smashed by HK, a 100% loss.

    As a professional writer, I'm used to literary types endlessly -- and endlessly -- arguing about everything and anything. As a hurricane survivor, I have first-hand knowledge of nature's destructive power.

    Some folks want to live in an earthquake zone, flood plain, hurricane zone -- their choice. Just don't expect others to subsidize their choice -- or heroically rescue them if something goes wrong. That's on them, that's their issue.

  • Apologist politics
  • Posted by huntly on September 7, 2005 at 8:43am EDT
  • No Kevin, poor people can't afford a bus ticket out of town--that's what makes them poor. Elderly and sick people can't pack up their bags and run for the hills either. Nor can foreign tourists make it very far on their rented bicycles. No amount of proper warning or news flashes would do anything to actually help these people. Local, state, and federal government intervention might.

    It's also pretty obvious that none of these agencies did "everything they could"--they overlooked the obvious, failed to take the threat seriously, failed to act quickly or with enough resources, failed to show proper appreciation or compassion for what was happening. President Bush's primary concern in addressing the nation on the first day was to calm our fears about gas prices--as if that was our greatest dilemma!

    As for people living in "disaster-prone areas," have you found a place that isn't vulnerable to disaster? It certainly isn't a major city, or one with any industrial resources; it isn't a town on any coast in America; it isn't near a fault-zone or a large body of water; it isn't prone to extreme temperatures or weather patterns; it's never experienced a drought or a tornado--where exactly is this Paradise? When you find it, pass the word on to the rest of America, so that our huddled masses can flock there.

    Blaming people for living in New Orleans, for not spending the last of their welfare check on a bus ticket, or for being angry at the incompetence of their government is precisely the kind of arrogant apologist stance that will burn this administration in the long run.

  • Paradise? Try Lake Woebegone ..
  • Posted by Bob A. on September 7, 2005 at 9:59am EDT
  • "When you find it, pass the word on to the rest of America, so that our huddled masses can flock there."

    Try the central U.S., outside the tornado zone. It can be cool and chilly, with mild flooding, and no ocean-view -- but no earthquakes or hurricanes. Thanks for the question -- you're welcome.

    BTW: should anyone be angry at the Democrat local and Democrat state government officials? Who waited so long to act? Check this out ..

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007219

    There's plenty of blame to go around, IMHO.

  • p.s.
  • Posted by huntly on September 7, 2005 at 10:36am EDT
  • Great! I hope there's lots of jobs there in fictional middle-America for all the displaced working class poor who will be streaming from all parts of the country to escape the hell that is urban-life.

    It's all good and well for middle-class suburbanites and middle-Americans to scoff at those who "choose" to live in more dangerous places, but are they ready to open their communities and workplaces to the millions of people who have no choice but to go where they have to for a livelihood? A lot of those people living in the poor neighborhoods of New Orleans are there to support the party-habits of rich, white frat-boys who think that the city is just their weekend playground. Explain to them again how its their fault that the city isn't safe.

    And yes, local and state governments bear equal responsibility for this disaster. I've heard nothing but excuses and political-banter from everyone involved. But our federal agencies knew (or should have known) full-well that this kind of hurricane would easily overwhelm local capabilities and resources, and should have been marshalling forces two days before the storm hit, not to mention immediately afterwards. The claims of ignorance and bureacratic "process" are all bullshit. No governor or mayor has ever said "no" to federal disaster aid. And Bush's delayed "compassion" for the people of the Gulf Coast is abominable. I think his approval ratings had already dropped a few points and gas prices soared before he began to really sense a problem. Top that off with FEMA's woeful disorganization and Dennis Hastert's heartless "bull-dozer" mentality, and you have the federal "response" in sum.

  • Catch a Bus
  • Posted by Ophelia Benson , Editor at Butterflies and Wheels on September 7, 2005 at 2:28pm EDT
  • Also, Kevin - the buses shut down. The city buses, Greyhound, Amtrak, and the airlines, all shut down operations. People without cars or unable to drive were well and truly stuck.

  • Photo of unused NOLA buses
  • Posted by A.D. on September 8, 2005 at 7:34am EDT
  • http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050901/capt.flpc21109012015.hurricane_katrina_flpc211.jpg?x=120&y=74&sig=feYm9KYurxkhYsBHJu_mhg--

    Some of the 200+ NOLA school and NOLA city buses not used to evacuate local residents before HK. Under water, instead of out-of-town with living people.

    I've yet to hear any local or state official explain why these buses weren't used to evacuate residents before HK.

  • Predictable disasters: L.A. Times
  • Posted by Bob A. on September 8, 2005 at 7:58am EDT
  • http://www.latimes.com/business/la-me-quake8sep08,0,2489361,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines

    Appears to me to be a prediction, of a lot of deaths and billions of dollars of damage.

    BTW: Lake Woebegone isn't fictional. The author says it is in Central Minnesota.

    http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0012/feature5/

    Not on a flood plain. In the hurricane zone. Next to the ocean.

  • Predict Disaster (LATimes), Pt II
  • Posted by Bob A. on September 10, 2005 at 4:13pm EDT
  • http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20050909/bs_bw/b3951005

    All the words in the world, all the planning in the world, won't deflect an earthquake on a mission ..

  • Risk
  • Posted by Kevin , Undergraduate on September 12, 2005 at 9:07pm EDT
  • An unflattering assesment of state and local (and federal, though less so) responses will certainly emerge from the pages of history to be written of this disaster.

    Although busses shut down unacceptably early and resumed unacceptably late, there still was a not inconsiderable period of time between a high probability of the hurricane striking the city was established and when the bus service ended. Those who did not take advantage of the busses while they were available were stranded. This does not mean that the federal government "sentenced them to death." FEMA's officials reacted to the best of their (limited) ability, and mistakes were made.

    I concur with Bob A. in stating that most of America is not disaster prone. While a hurrican hit D.C. in 1812 and Hurricane Gloria almost hit New York, most of America's east coast inland a few miles or north of Virginia can be considered pretty safe from the forces of nature.

    Likewise, Chicago has not had a natural disaster in memory, and the great Chicago fire (man-made) was over a century ago. It could be considered safe - north of most tornado's range (an occasional one touches down in the area), hurricane and tidal wave proof, and not on any fault line. Further, the city could hardly be considered exclusive to white rich people.

    The fact that people continue to live in disaster-prone areas is their own choice. But if they live there of their choice, and their freely elected government is unable to make the necessary effort to protect them through fixing its levees or making evacuation arrangement, than the assumption that the federal government can ride in on white horse and fix it for them is rather absurd. FEMA does not have the resources nor the local contact, nor the effective leadership in Brown to make up for the shortcomings and poor choices of individuals and local and state governments. Its major errors in no way absolves them of their own.