Hurricane Katrina, Kanye West, The Media, American Contextualization

The thing that irritates me is that FEMA, which was made a cabinet-level organization after the last time the gov't responded poorly to a hurricane, was put under the Dept. Homeland Security and, I think, hindered from doing its job as a result of putting it one step farther away from the president and the power it really needs to act decisively. And by the way, doesn't anyone at Homeland Security WATCH TELEVISION! The convention center catastrophe was inexcusable.

Good stuff, but I think you meant to type "understandable" rather than "understanding" in the first few paragraphs.

Nice post.

Josiah,

Nice post. I agree with almost everything you say, and I admire the restraint you use when discussing issues such as these. I think your statement about " American optimism in the face of impending disaster" hit the nail right on the head.

I am troubled by the statement that "Our country simply isn't setup in an authortarian enough fashion to allow for a rapid-response to large-scale disaster." That is exactly what the Dept. of Homeland Security was designed for, and one of the 15 scenarios that DHS evidently prepared and trained for was a rapid-response to a category 5 hurricane. The American public has spent billions if not trillions of the DHS and I think we have a right, a duty even, to demand results from such a costly agency that was created to handle emergencies exactly like Katrina. If they are not doing their job the American public needs to demand answers to why this happened. If we don't than similar and worse will undoubtedly occur again.

As long as we're speculating about Bush's racist tendencies, then it's also likely that Kanye West, being a sinner, is trying to get attention back on him and his new album, which was eclipsed by Katrina. Now everyone is talking about him again, rather than just Katrina, and it's likely that that will turn into sales for him. I don't think he's stupid, but his comment will probably help his sales in the end.

Josiah,

I know you said that our tendency to wait until shit hits the fan is not an excuse for the president's complacency even if he simply reflects our own. But those "not excuses" are all the very things we need to be dealing with here -- eventually. All this energy spent pointing fingers (and covering asses) while the situation is still dire is really ridiculous. If this emergency could have been dealt with better and lives could have been saved were it not for nagging American collective consciousness tendencies, then maybe there are things we should work on changing in our attitudes (without throwing away the baby with the bathwater).

it seems like it's human nature to attempt to place blame as soon as possible. the most logical choice in this situation would be to blame God, or at least cry out to Him. but since the big media would have us believe that God is dead, this wont do. so the next best choice is to blame big govt. especially if we dont like those in power.

Josh/Paul,

Part of the problem with the Dept. of Homeland security is that it doesn't actually expedite anything legally. Regardless of what the Dept. of Homeland security was designed TO do, it doesn't change that for it to actually do something (like deploying troops to a region for relief/security efforts) there's longstanding laws the dictate how that needs to occur (which takes time).

A couple things I'm certain of though: the Governor of Louisiana should have declared Louisiana in a state of emergency far sooner and mobilized the national guard immediately. Two things she waited till the later part of the week to do.

Further, the President COULD have Federalized the National Guard of Louisiana himself and sent them in, but something he was wary of doing for legal reason etc. I find that highly ironic, given the apparently impulsive nature of this President.

The problem is doing so would still have been an enormously complicated thing to do legally and politically (and I'm trying to research to find out the full extent of its complication). Again, it becomes a command and control situation.

If the President federalizes the National Guard and sends them in, then responsiblity falls to the Pentagon for their organization/operation. This sidesteps FEMA (I think, though I'm fairly sure), which is supposed to run point on national disasters (but wasn't able to since the Lousiana Gov. was dragging her feat). Which introduces a whole new set of problems: by federalizing the national guard for a non-police action (which federalization is traditionally for) you cut out of the picture the very organization designed to respond to this situation including its necessary resources (food, water, etc. all things FEMA has in reserve, and not the national guard or the pentagon).

Then there's the whole issue of local forces. FEMA normally runs point overseeing local police, national guard, etc. But because neither the Gov or the Mayor declared states of emergency, mobilized the National Guard, or invited the military in (it's illegal for the Federal Government to send any military forces into any State i.e. "invade", that's why they have military bases and the National Guard) everything got completely screwed up.

Alright. I keep getting interrupted while trying to write this comment. So I apologize if it ended up incoherent. I'll try to sum up:

1. Dept. of Homeland security was for internal coherence and its formation doesn't side-step existing laws which make a rapid, Federal response to natural disasters via the military nearly impossible ("dirty bombs" etc. are acts of war so different laws apply).

2. The Governor of Louisiana as far as I can tell completely dropped the ball refusing to mobilize the National Guard and declaring a state of emergency far sooner (thereby getting FEMA where it needs to be in terms of manpower/resources).

3. Bush's failing was for, in this situation, not acting in a more autocratic fashion. To do so though would have likely complicated the situation even more, sidestepping those policies and agencies currently in place to address natural disasters. Still, that doesnt' mean he couldn't have done it anyway.

4. We still need all the details.

I don't think it matters much at all if private citizens begin talking about blame. We're not using any resources up by trying to get our heads around who was responsible and where failures occurred. The situation is dire, but we cannot do anything either way, so what difference does it make if we try to assess blame?

Scott, there's a difference between trying to assess blame and assigning blame, and at this stage in the whole thing, with the complexities etc. I think its somewhat premature to declare with authority who's at fault for what where when.

Good post, Josiah. The response to this disaster has been quintessentially American. Everyone looks for "what went wrong" as though the answer "a hurricane" is insufficient - the subconscious assumption of national omni-competence requires that someone be found accountable. Even your concluding sentence - "whether we crucify X, Y or Z" assumes that *someone* better damn well be found to bear the blame in the end. Which is not to say that some measure of culpable government failure may not have been involved. It's just unfortunate that most critics don't seem to recognize that to an extent disaster-prevention is a zero sum game: resources allocated to maintaining rapid-response teams can't be used to improve housing or health care elsewhere, and powers ceded to the government to allow a more "autocratic" response necessarily means that other freedoms will be abridged. The ironic thing is that the tangled body of "improvements" which will likely emerge after the bureaucratic blame-game is over may not even increase efficiency - the only ultimate benefit may be that everyone will be that much cannier at evading responsibility next time around.

VERY well put, Julian...

How about this. Kanye West was incredibly inarticulate (half the time it was hard to even know what he was talking about), insensitive and untruthful. What he said about GWB probably isn't true and it's certainly false that "they sent people down their to shoot us [black people]."

Also, josiah, you will NEVER get all the facts. But it says something that the people who know the most (the President, governors, NO's mayor, and Congress) all say that things were handled poorly and that we should have done better. It is American for usto decry the slow response. It is not American to accept it as simply "we've always sucked at these things."

JQR...This is MWA. This has nothing to do with Katrina. I'm on my fourth Boddington's right now and find it necessary (amidst my horrible typing (that i'm correcting)) to inform you, my friend, that today, I purchased a 2005 Tangerine Orange Stella. Delivery is on Friday. I thought you, if anyone, should know. Let's ride.

Well sure - no one can say with authority where fault lies until we have more information. But the process of collecting and disseminating information so that we can try to get our heads around where the breakdown occurred, if it occurred - that doesn't seem to be inappropriate.

Scott, I was referring more to the government officials who are also spending a lot of energy trying to escape some sort of blame (even if blame is misplaced -- I think Julian's post addressed that well.) Anyway, I have no problem with analyzing as best as we can if we have already done all as individuals we can do.

Mostly, I am sick of the "f**k you, (person X)" style of internet rhetoric that reproduces like the proverbial rabbit whenever someone finds someone else to blame for whatever reason. And I was also trying to critique the "this is America and this is how we do things" element of Josiah's post that needs to be rethought.

Hope that clarifies my point.

Paul, in no way was I saying "this is America this is how we do things" in an affirming sense (i.e. I think its a good thing). I was asserting it as part of our cultural context, that we shouldn't be surprised when things occur because of it, and that we should recognize our own participation in that context. Hence "American Contextualization" in the title.

I just thought all you concerned citizens might like to know that you can sign up to offer housing to displaced hurricane victims at the following website:

www.hurricanehousing.org

Josiah,

You're absolutely right that it is a necessary contextual element that must be understood. And you were very clear in pointing out that that context is not an excuse. So I'm sorry if I was putting words into your mouth. I just wanted to raise the point that too often we assume that our cultural attitudes are inescapable and unchangable. I was once having a conversation with someone and the issue of the per capita murder rate in the US was raised. The person simply wrote it off with a "That's the way it is here, we're a rough bunch and always have been." Not exactly a productive response, in my mind.

Sorry if I attributed that sentiment to you unjustly.

I can't believe I missed this great post - good comments by all.

Very nice post Josiah.

[-p]

Nice post. As someone from south Louisiana, I appreciate your objectiveness and unwillingness to barge in and say crap like everyone else seems to want to do. I do have one bone to pick with you--in a later comment you stated that Blanco didn't mobilize the National Guard until later in the week, that isn't accurate. 4,000 troops were mobilized before the hurricane hit, but 4,000 troops just isn't enough when levees break. I can't say she did a wonderful job--God knows she failed to do some things as soon as she ought to have--but that isn't one of her total mistakes. Of course, I didn't vote for her--I don't think she was ever qualified for the job, but what can you do--she done the best she knew to do. It isn't the best, but hindsight is always really great. :)