What a week. The hurricane and stunning abandonment of New Orleans by the fed shocked me as I once again saw that there are two Americas.
On the down side, the victims of the hurricane are still getting the shaft
from the federal government. The Wall Street Journal on Thursday ran a story
about the effects of Katrina on the wealthy of New Orleans. It discussed
private security teams helicoptered in to guard the estates of the
well-heeled, even as the poor crowded unfed and unwatered into the shameful
and nasty environs of the convention center and Superdome. They could have
dispatched their helicopters to drop water and food, but chose not to.
Now the government is allowing the rich to place armed guards at their
homes, while confiscating the firearms of homeowners who cannot afford a
private security firm. Meanwhile, the Bush Administration recalls FEMA
director Michael Brown to Washington, while praising him for a job well
done. Despite how it¹s getting played in the media, Brown is not being
fired. Katrina cleanup is simply being reassigned to lower-level personnel
while Brown, Chertoff, and Bush keep their jobs and accept no
responsibility. The whole episode is disgusting. This time, it happened to
be New Orleans, but it could have been anywhere.
Knowing that, Rogers Park residents came together with the Village of
Harvey, IL to send provisions to the south to address the immediate needs.
The Village of Harvey, we discovered, is a special place. Their entire
government, from the Mayor to the newest officer on the police force
self-directed an organized relief effort. They didn't wait for FEMA or the
President or anyone else; they moved decisively when it counted. When we
told people we were going to help and that it was a race against time,
Rogers Park residents stepped up without hesitation.
There was the Tuesday night Sexfist Bluegrass Band show, where the band let
me explain to the crowd what we were doing, then asked everyone to give
generously and proceeded to donate every last cent to the effort. There were
guys I met for the first time who pushed everything else aside to drive
supplies to the pick up point. Ennui Café became a collection point and
staging area for us to assemble each morning, their patrons emptying their
pockets as they saw what was happening. Even a locksmith, working on a door
overheard a discussion and gave us twenty bucks, saying: "You guys are
doing something-I want to help."
Again and again, convoys wended their way through the city to the south
suburbs to bring water, baby formula, canned goods, diapers, and
disinfectant to trucks going to the South. It's nice to know that whatever
our differences, we see what's really important and share the courage to act
on it. There were local tragedies this week, and we have a lot to do close
to home. But when people a thousand miles away were truly desperate, for a
few critical days Rogers Park stood out as a place that was doing
something.
That's something we should all be proud of.
James Ginderske
5 comments:
While I agree that government on all levels failed to protect and care for the most vulnerable in society in Louisiana, I find the finger-pointing to government somewhat disheartening. It speaks to a peoples (that would be us) who have ceded their very existence to politicians and government. It speaks to how we have infantiled ourselves so horribly to Big Brother, expecting the Nanny State to rescue us. Even on this blog we point to what government is or is not doing. But at the end of the day it is people -- each of us -- who is responsible for, first and foremost, ourselves, and then, for those who have the ability -- for each other -- our neighbors, our families, our friends, and even strangers in need. We must all be leaders and not wait for others to tend to us or tell us what to do.
While government (at all levels) failed to lead (and when has any government of any kind in any place ever led anything meaningful or successful except war, either to protect or defend?), I find that I am heartened by the many thousands if not hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens who didn't wait for some government official to tell them to donate money to the Red Cross (by Thurs., 9/1 over $300 million had been donated before a single celeb concert), or to get in their cars or trucks and drive water and food to help. People and businesses from ordinary folks to that evil Walmart took action (of course, in some cases government thwarted their actions) from bringing water to food to personally reuniting mothers and children.
Katrina may have brought out the worst in government -- which should, in fact, be no great surprise. But Katrina brought out the very best in infinitely more *individual* people than not. Individuals, working together, either through charitable relief organizations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army, will do more than government (and would have done more to protect and care for people had government not thwarted their efforts). In the great flood of 1929 it was individuals and charitable organizations that came to the rescue far more than government (regardless of Herbert Hoover's assertions that government would rescue the folks -- it didn't).
We should be heartened by the spirit, generosity, and compassion of ordinary people. Government, by its very nature, run by politicians and beaurocrats, will always fail on some level. But under our constitution people can still prevail. And that is good for everyone -- from those who can care for themselves to those who are not able. I'll take the compassion of some stranger in Wyoming or the assistance of a neighbor over a politician, a government agency, or a beaurocrat any day. If any thing comes out of what are sure to be numerous money-wasting studies, investigations, and task forces (government tends to be good at paperwork) I hope it is that government acknowledges that it should get out of the way in the future. The resources a government possesses (police, military, etc.) should be used to assist the people -- not to control and decide for the people. And we need to hold government to their contract with us -- they are here at our pleasure and they serve us. They don't control us.
Thomas -- your explanation of the philosophical differences between the Republican and Democratic viewpoints toward government lays out nicely why I am neither, and why libertarian/objectivist principles appeal to me more now than when I first came upon them 20-odd years ago. Both the Republican and Democratic approaches to disaster problem solving failed miserably in NO. The Democratic mayor of NO failed, the Democratic governor of LA failed, the Democratic senator of LA failed (and one might say they've failed for years to help a goodly portion of their citizenry out of poverty), the Republican federal administration failed and 100s of beaurocrats of both stripes failed. In my view, they should all lose their jobs (if I failed as miserably in my job, I would most certainly be fired).
Think back to 9/11 and how it was that that crisis of that day was met much differently -- government largely got out of the way of itself and allowed the people to take care of themselves (by leaving NYC and helping others to leave and get to safe ground -- without interference). And where government did intervene it generally failed (NYC firemen with problem communications, FAA slow to respond, etc.). Given that the Bushies had not been on the job long, those failures are hard to lay entirely at their feet. Government, regardless of who is running the show, is too big and too cumbersome and too concerned with political matters or paperwork to move quickly (hell, it took months just to get our military over to Iraq; Saddam had such warning it's still shocking to me that he didn't take action much prior). Government can be wielded to help clean up problems but it's almost never on the front line of addressing problems in advance or responding quickly to problems(witness everyone's complaints about CAPS). Cops show up to investigate crime after it's happened (and sometimes not very effectively).
I am not proposing that we strip government and/or its programs but that our expectations of what government can and cannot do be realistic. We should demand that our government serve us but at the same time we should also demand that it get out of the way so that, as every doctor must swear, it first does no harm. Under such a scenario we at least have the ability as individuals to take care of ourselves and each other. That should be protected at all costs.
While individuals might not have helicopters and other large machinery at their immediate disposal, many businesses and individual business people do -- and these people immediately jumped on the scene to help. Listening to NPR last weekend during a roadtrip I heard many stories of businesses and people rushing in with what they had to help -- from boats to semi-trucks. The U.S. government is not the only owner of heavy machinery (in fact, it's business that they buy their equipment from). As a small example of how quickly business mobilizes: by 8/31 the company I work for, headquartered in NYC, had sent out a memo saying that they would match employee contributions to the Red Cross. This is one publishing company in one city. Walmart had already sent water (though the officials -- who exactly remains to be seen -- prevented them from delivering such). There are 100s of these stories where the people (either private individuals or organized in business) didn't wait for orders and came with heavy equipment.
Partisan politics is a guarantee that nothing will get done because the fight, at the end of the day, is about protecting the party and/or politician interests. It's how Joe Moore has stayed in office all these years.
James -- agree with your comments re 9/11 and I guess I should have been clearer in stating that not just business but individuals are also capable of responding faster than government agencies. In NYC the actions of the first responders (firemen, policemen) were truly heroic, as were the actions of 1000s of NYers (who really are some of the nicest people). NO clearly didn't have the same kind of first responders and/or they were unable to respond in a meaningful fashion. That said, government did get out of the way in terms of people fleeing the city whereas government (in the form of the police) prohibited NO residents from fleeing the city into Gretna, for instance. Government was insistent on controlling everything (such as evacuation, for instance, so they prohibited anyone from entering with supplies initially) and it all failed, whereas if they had let people take care of themselves and each other the outcome would likely have been dramatically different. I imagine that if people had not felt so trapped they might not have resorted to looting and other criminal behavior (though government in NO also blew it when they let a bunch of criminals out of jail and unleashed them on the citizenry and when that full story comes out it will be devastating for the mayor and the police chief).
We all owe our undying gratitude to the dedication and devotion of the first responders in NYC (I attended my fair share of NYC policeman memorials). That said, I do think that so many of them would not have died had their communications equipment been working properly. Also, do remember that it was government (the fire marshall, if I recall correctly) that told those in the north tower to return to their offices after the the south tower had been hit. One of my friends chose to disregard the instructions, fortunately, as her fate would have been different. Even the 9/11 commission acknowledged that government failed on many levels on 9/11. In that case individuals (be they first responders or private citizens) were the real heroes of the day.
Initial rescue of people in emergency situations is rarely coordinated so much as one person (or a group of individuals) take a leadership position while acknowledging that they cannot and perhaps should not control everything. Leaders allow for a certain amount of chaos and acknowledge that some amount of uncontrolled relief is better than no relief; that in a chaotic, desperate situation one doesn't have the luxury of time. In the case of 9/11 we saw many leaders and Mayor Rudy led like a champ. Personally, I think his reaction and that situation was unique for its suddenness. Most politicians (albeit not all) really aren't very good leaders and no government agency I've ever dealt with has moved quickly. By their nature they are beholden to rule books and protocol which slow things horribly. Organizations such as the Red Cross, on the other hand, are very used to mobilizing and moving quickly. I don't think we should, in the words of Blanche DuBois, simply depend on the kindess of strangers (be they people or businesses) but what we (meaning each of us and government) should do is allow those with the means to rescue and provide relief to do so -- and to not thwart their efforts in the name of "control."
Small example -- some kid set our yard on fire about 6 years ago. By the time I realized it, the fire was burning wildly. I called the fire dept. (only 2 blocks away) but the fire was growing. A passerby helped me to drag the hose from our back yard to the front and we were able to douse almost all the flames even before the fire truck arrived. While the fire dept. would have put the fire out before the house went up, I think our actions were wise and prevented a worse condition. Further, it was passersby who caught the culprits, not the police. This is what I mean about individuals taking action and not waiting for "government" to do it all. If we had waited for the fire dept./police then we would have had to wait to file a report, etc. while the juvenile deliquents got away. But we all took action, put the fire out, and caught the culprit.
Post a Comment