Question on Hurricane Katrina

[1Parker1]

I know I don't normally post in the Political Forum (partly because I'm a little scared of some of the posters ), but I need your help. I'm doing a paper for my Morality and Law class on Hurricane Katrina and would like your opinions.

My question is this: Do you consider what happened to the citizens of NO both in the wake of and prior to Hurricane Katrina as an "act of violence?" Perhaps by the government, by "nature," etc. Violence is sort of an ambiguous term that can mean a lot of different things, so I guess your responses will depend on what you think of it.

[FromWayDowntown]

Violence, to me at least, generally means something that isn't really random. A hurricane striking New Orleans is, in a number of ways, a random event. To me, what happened in New Orleans was basically negligence on a great number of levels -- negligence on the part of government at all levels in preparation for a storm of that magnitude; negligence in responding to a storm like Katrina; negligence in perpetuating a socio-economic system in which so many were so deeply impoverished and hopeless that leaving New Orleans was a practical impossibility without further governmental assistance.

From that negligence, violence was visited upon some, but I think that resulted primarily from an immediate and unprecedented exacerbation of the already-existing problems.

[BeerIsGood!]

If you believe that God exists and controls the day to day operations of the earth as an "all knowing" being then I guess you'd have to say God perpetuated a violent act on the people of NO and the Gulf Coast region.

[01Snake]

George Bush hates black people!

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Violence, to me at least, generally means something that isn't really random. A hurricane striking New Orleans is, in a number of ways, a random event. To me, what happened in New Orleans was basically negligence on a great number of levels -- negligence on the part of government at all levels in preparation for a storm of that magnitude; negligence in responding to a storm like Katrina; negligence in perpetuating a socio-economic system in which so many were so deeply impoverished and hopeless that leaving New Orleans was a practical impossibility without further governmental assistance.

From that negligence, violence was visited upon some, but I think that resulted primarily from an immediate and unprecedented exacerbation of the already-existing problems.

Well said, sir.

[BeerIsGood!]

Violence, to me at least, generally means something that isn't really random. A hurricane striking New Orleans is, in a number of ways, a random event. To me, what happened in New Orleans was basically negligence on a great number of levels -- negligence on the part of government at all levels in preparation for a storm of that magnitude; negligence in responding to a storm like Katrina; negligence in perpetuating a socio-economic system in which so many were so deeply impoverished and hopeless that leaving New Orleans was a practical impossibility without further governmental assistance.

From that negligence, violence was visited upon some, but I think that resulted primarily from an immediate and unprecedented exacerbation of the already-existing problems.

Is the government responsible for getting poor people out of a city about to be hit by a hurricane?

They should have just treated NO like a pack of cigarettes:

U.S. Government Warning: Living in a city that is below sea level may result in involuntary loss of life and property due to natural disasters.

[George W Bush]

George Bush hates black people!

Who told you!

[Nbadan]

Katrina was an uncontrollable, destructive force and can thus be characterized as having been ‘violent’ I suppose, but I don’t think the government’s role can be labeled as violent. Even in a meta-physical sense, bureaucracy has no feelings, it just is. That’s why we elect leaders who can cut through the bureaucracy.

[FromWayDowntown]

Is the government responsible for getting poor people out of a city about to be hit by a hurricane?

They should have just treated NO like a pack of cigarettes:

U.S. Government Warning: Living in a city that is below sea level may result in involuntary loss of life and property due to natural disasters.

When the government knows that more than 150,000 people lack independent means to evacuate a city, I'd say that it does have some responsibility to ensure that those individuals are provided a means to comply with a mandatory evacuation.

So, yes.

[101A]

Katrina was an uncontrollable, destructive force and can thus be characterized as having been ‘violent’ I suppose, but I don’t think the government’s role can be labeled as violent. Even in a meta-physical sense, bureaucracy has no feelings, it just is. That’s why we elect leaders who can cut through the bureaucracy.

Well said. I would argue, however, that we elect leaders, usually, who ADD to the bureacracy.

[Yonivore]

In the context of a paper on morality and law, I'd characterize Hurricane Katrina as a destructive act of God.

I believe that's still a legal term of art.

[ChumpDumper]

It was that gay pride parade that did it.

[Clandestino]

many people who didn't want to leave their home..

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

It should be a wake up call to everyone who thinks that in the event of a cataclysmic disaster the government will roll down Main Street 5 minutes later to save them.

[FromWayDowntown]

It should be a wake up call to everyone who thinks that in the event of a cataclysmic disaster the government will roll down Main Street 5 minutes later to save them.

. . . even if an educational and economic system in your city deprive you of meaningful opportunity to acquire the assets necessary to own luxuries like cars or other independent means of escaping.

Seriously, were the systemically poor who resided in places like the Lower Ninth supposed to just walk from New Orleans to Baton Rouge to evacuate that city? Were they supposed to sell all of their assets to buy transportation out of the city? Many of those people relied on governmental transportation for movement in their everyday lives, but when their lives depended on being able to move, it's just too bad that government failed them?

I've never understood the "don't be stupid" argument in the NOLA context, because a large number of those who stayed had no realistic other choice. Those who were willfully ignorant of the storm's force and just decided to ride it out are one question; those who had no real chance to get out without governmental assistance are an entirely different question.

If government can't aid people who are otherwise unable to escape an emergency, what is government for? I really don't understand this point because, after all, when Americans were in danger in Lebanon, the government had no real difficulty in chartering luxury boats and evacuating those people from the risk of losing their lives. Americans in Lebanon deserve better threatment than Americans in New Orleans?

[01Snake]

Yes, some didn't have the means to leave BUT a TON of them did but decided not to. The city should have had a plan in place to remove elderly, disabled, etc people that couldn't get out themselves.

A delt with so many people down in NOLA last year and many of them decided to ride it out due to the fact that they have evacuated so many times and the city was never hit. Many took their chances and lost.

[Clandestino]

in the u.s. everyone HAS the chance to get ahead. many are too lazy to try. i have talked to many people who volunteered and many cops who were disgusted by how ungrateful the new orleans people were....

[Nbadan]

It was always estimated that about 10% of the city would stick it out no matter what, but in a city of 1+ million people, your talking ~100,000 stayed behind - that's a crisis during a natural disaster like Katrina. The plan was always to stick people who couldn't get out of town into the Superdome, not put them into buses bound to where-ever. There was no plan for that, no coordination, even if Nagin had confiscated every school bus in N.O. there wouldn't have been the gas to go anywhere because motorists had sucked up all the gas heading the out of town. So this whole issue on the buses is a silly issue. The real issue should be the negligent construction of the concrete levees that gave way and the poor local evacuation procedures and State and Federal Emergency coordination and response.

[MannyIsGod]

Funny, cause I volunteered and they were anything but ungrateful.

[MannyIsGod]

Anyone can spin it anyway they want, but the government failed. Thats the bottom line.

[Nbadan]

Funny, cause I volunteered and they were anything but ungrateful.

Blah, that just the standard wing-nut response.

[01Snake]

Anyone can spin it anyway they want, but the government failed. Thats the bottom line.

So nobody is responsible but the Gov huh?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

FWD,

My point is that I have a good friend from college who grew up there. He told me many times that if a big storm ever hit NO, they were screwed.

Now, I certainly feel for the people down there who wanted to get out but had no means. But at the same time, you had the director of the hurricane center telling anyone and everyone who would listen to get the out. And then you had the mayor and governor sitting on their asses with lots of resources at their disposal to evacuate sitting in parking lots waiting to be used.

I have a sister in the Army Nurse Corps and they started calling THREE days before it hit, as soon as the NHC called the shot, and offered trucks, etc. to come evacuate. But Nagin and others said they'd get back to them. And then all of a sudden, 24 hours before it hits, it's 'oh , we're ed, what do we do now.'

Then people were ing when the city flooded and they needed evaced asap. There's only so many helicopters to go around for rescues.

My comment was more directed at post-tragedy security, and all the violence, etc. in the city. When you're talking about a city that big, there's just no way to secure it or expect the police to be able to show up in 30 seconds when the hits the fan.

We recently had a pretty heated debate on here about gun control, etc. My comment was partially directed at that.

The biggest problem in NO is that an extremely liberal government, from the city to parish to state level, had created a largely socialist environment in NO and surrounding areas.

People there had become largely content with expecting to just stick out their hands and have the government fill them with whatever it was they were asking for. Bottom line, when something of this enormity comes around, you've got to take responsibility for yourself.

What happened with seniors/medically unable to evacuate/financially unable to evac was deplorable, and hopefully everyone in this country learned from it, because we'll undoubtedly face something again in our lifetimes or our childrens.

My main beef with this situation is the whole race card being played politically. A lot of folks seem to want to play this up. Galveston got wiped out by a similar sized storm back at the turn of the 20th century, and that socioeconomic situation was completely different from that in NO, but the aftermath of the disaster there played out in much the same way.

Did the people of Galveston feel sorry for themselves and play the race card? no, they dusted off their shoulders, rebuilt their city, and went on with living their lives.

Similarly, you don't hear the people of Alabama and Mississippi, who were hit just as hard as NO, crying for help and coming on with the 'whoa is us', 'George Bush hates black people' .

THey rolled up their sleaves and helped their neighbors clean up and rebuild. I'm sorry, I just have a hard time feeling sorry for all the people crying about all the government handouts they're en led to when their neighbors in Miss. and Alabama are facing the same thing and seem to be dealing with it just fine, despite having a lot of the same socioeconomic makeup as the hapless New Orleanians.

[MannyIsGod]

So nobody is responsible but the Gov huh?

I never said that. I said the government dropped the ball. Its funny, I can make a simple statement and you can even try to spin that.

[Nbadan]

Did the people of Galveston feel sorry for themselves and play the race card? no, they dusted off their shoulders, rebuilt their city, and went on with living their lives.

...but most of the people killed in Galveston w

here white.


Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?