[Peace] Fwd: [Sdas] Parenti / Vltchek; How the Free Market Killed New Orleans / Hurricane Katrina – View From Asia / Sep 3

[Susan Parenti]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: <mi-silva at uiuc.edu>
> Date: September 3, 2005 3:11:45 PM CDT
> To: sdas at che.ojctech.com
> Subject: [Sdas] Parenti / Vltchek; How the Free Market Killed  New  
> Orleans / Hurricane Katrina – View From Asia / Sep 3
>
>
>
> FYI. From ZNet's subscriber's commentary service.
>
> ===========================
>
>  ZNet Commentary
>  How the Free Market Killed New Orleans
>  by Michael Parenti
>  http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2005-09/03parenti.cfm
>
>  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.
>
>  -------Michael Parenti's recent books include
> Superpatriotism (City  Lights) and The Assassination of
> Julius Caesar (New Press), both available in paperback. His
> forthcoming The Culture Struggle (Seven   Stories Press) will
> be published in the fall. For more information
> visit: www.michaelparenti.org.
>
>
>
>  ZNet Commentary
> Hurricane Katrina – View From Asia
> by Andre  Vltchek
> http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2005-09/03vltchek.cfm
>
> More than 8 months ago, one of the worst natural disasters in
> a  human history destroyed substantial part of a province
> under  Indonesian control - Aceh. Although exact number will
> never be  known, close to 250 thousand people lost their
> lives during the  under-ocean earthquake and consequent
> tsunami; tens of thousands died in Sri Lanka, India and
> Thailand combined. It is now clear  that tens of thousands
> more people died due to inadequate response  of Indonesian
> government and military, stranded in remote areas   with no
> food, drinking water, shelter and medical care.
>
> Your correspondent went to Thailand and then to Aceh; to
> cover  extend of disaster, almost immediately accusing
> Indonesian   authorities of disorganized, chaotic reaction;
> of deployment of  religious "volunteers" instead of
> professionals. He accused  Indonesian military of sabotaging
> the aid, of stealing food and
> water desperately needed for those who managed to survive. In
> one  of his reports he concluded that most of the people in
> Aceh "died  because they were poor": would such a disaster
> strike in Singapore  or in other wealthy nation instead of in
> Indonesia where tens of   millions live in appalling
> shantytowns, there would be only a  fraction of the
> casualties.
>
> It is now September 2nd, and the cameras of almost all
> important  international news networks are zoomed on the
> desperate men, women   and children, begging for help,
> abandoned under the brutal sun with   almost no food, water
> and shelter; in one of the greatest   historical cities of
> The United States of America - New Orleans.
>
>  Today, one of the reports by Reuters starts with these
> words: "U.S.  troops poured into New Orleans of Friday with
> shoot-to-kill orders  to scare off looting gangs so rescuers
> can help thousands of people  stranded by Hurricane Katrina,
> find the dead and clean up the  carnage." But during the
> previous days, cameras recorded "looting"  by desperate men
> and women, breaking into the supermarkets and
> stores, simply trying to survive. Of course there are gangs
> terrorizing the people in New Orleans area; of course there
> is  shooting and anarchy; but is it the whole story? If the
> help would  arrive sooner; there would be obviously no need
> for looting and no  chance for gangs to organize.
>
> After flying over New Orleans (no doubt great sacrifice and
> expression of solidarity), President Bush spoke about
> restoring  order. It was obvious that defending private
> property was higher on
> his mind than suffering of his fellow citizens. He didn't
> explain  what good is rotting food in partially submerged
> supermarkets and  convenience stores anyway. One wonders
> whether this is a new and  powerful message from his
> administration: no matter what, the
> private property is untouchable and defending it is of
> greater  importance than saving human lives.
>
> Why did it take US troops so much time to enter New Orleans?
> Where  was all that heavy, high-tech equipment used all over
> the world,  mainly for shameful deeds? On September 1st,
> official argument went  that the aircraft carrier and several
> war ships just left East   Coast, and it will take them some
> time to reach Gulf of Mexico. But  why didn't they leave
> earlier; right away; few hours after extend
> of disaster became known?
>
> Eight months ago reaction of the Republic of Indonesia was
> similar:  while it takes just a few minutes, at most hours,
> for its military  to blow sky-high known positions of the
> rebels in Aceh or Papua;  after the tsunami, for many days,
> there was suddenly almost no  hardware available for the
> rescue missions. There was "not enough
> ships in the area"; soldiers and police on the ground
> were"too  overwhelmed". Government refused to take any
> decisive action, instead relying on the glorification of the
> "volunteers".
>
>  On the other hand, Thai Royal Air Force and navy mobilized
> almost   immediately after tsunami damaged great parts of its
> Southwest  coast. Helicopter crews, some risking their lives,
> were flying  thousands of sorties, trying to save people from
> the high seas and  from affected areas. I encountered several
> pilots close to the  airport of Phuket, late at night, their
> eyes red from lack of   sleep; grabbing something fast to eat
> before returning to the air -   exhausted but determined.
>
>  On Thursday, the whole world watched as buses were shuttling
> people  from the Dome in New Orleans (where almost everything
> collapsed;  from air conditioning to the toilets) to
> Astrodome in Huston, Texas  (where thousands of victims of
> the hurricane were expected to sleep   on the military beds
> and share just a few toilets originally
> designed for the athletes). It was hard to avoid asking: is
> this  really the best the US government can do for those who
> are  experiencing severe trauma; for those who lost
> everything? This is  not Aceh but Houston, Texas, the center
> of the US oil industry and  space program, with hundreds of
> hotels and motels spread all over  the area!
>
> In Thailand, dozens of hotels (and private homes) opened
> their  doors to survivors and to the family members (local
> and foreign)  who were searching for their loved ones. Was it
> lack of solidarity  of corporate America that prevented this
> from happening in the  United States? And if it was, why
> didn't the government force these   hotel doors open for
> refugees - through an emergency decree?  Or is   this just
> another proof that private sector and private property is
> sacred; more sacred than human life? Should it be taken as a
> warning: that from now on things will become this way?
>
>  For several days, there were countless images of the Coast
> Guard  helicopters rescuing residents in the flooded areas
> from their  rooftops and from their damaged homes.
> Helicopters were dropping  baskets, pulling victims on board.
> Most of those rescued did have  home as they lived in the
> residential areas. In the same time, we  were learning that
> people elsewhere were starving, literally
> dropping dead in the middle of the streets in the centre of
> New   Orleans.
>
> New Orleans is no doubt a segregated city. While it is
> surrounded  by posh neighborhoods (inhabited mainly by the
> whites), the city  center and several suburbs are homes to
> minorities. Some people  living there are poor; others very
> poor. Could it be possible that  even during the tragedy
> rescue operations are treating differently  rich and poor,
> black and white? Is there really a lack of  helicopters to
> airlift everyone; to bring them promptly to safety,  to give
> them decent temporary accommodation, private bathrooms and
> showers?
>
>  No matter what are the reasons, response to the tragedy in
> the Gulf  of Mexico was inadequate, scandalously slow;
> unforgivable. The   mightiest military power on earth
> couldn't (or refused to) deploy  soldiers right after the
> tragedy; it stood-by as people were dying
> in the centre of New Orleans which was just a few hours after
> the   hurricane definitely reachable from the air. The
> government of the   United States failed.
>
>  Months ago, your correspondent mistakenly claimed that what
> happened in Aceh could never happen in any developed country.
> The  government which would show such incompetence would be
> forced to   resign. His analyses were proven wrong by recent
> events in his own   country.
>
>  In Washington, there are no calls for impeachment and it
> seems that  no heads will roll as a result of what this
> outrageous failure
> which took lives of many men, women and children. Criticism
> in the   US mainstream press is half-hearted and when it
> appears, it is  diluted by the stories (always so much in
> demand and on offer)
> about the heroism and self-sacrifice of the rescue workers.
> It may   appear that although some mistakes were made,
> society is still  governed by the sound principles; that in
> essence everything is  correct.
>
> In reality almost nothing went right for the citizens of New
> Orleans, especially for the poor; and nothing is going right
> even  as these words are being written. White bags are
> covering corpses   of those who recently died on the streets
> of New Orleans; those who   died after the disaster - long
> after. Men, women and children are  spread on the ground,
> many almost motionless, in the center of the  city. They are
> hungry and thirsty; they have no place to wash and
> to urinate. And they are supposed to stay where they are;
> they are  not suppose to "loot" and if they, by any chance,
> decide to break  into some store and take food and water,
> there are orders to shoot
> and kill them!
>
> END
>
> Andre Vltchek is a writer, political analyst and filmmaker
> and he  can be reached at: andre-wcn at usa.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sdas mailing list
> Sdas at che.ojctech.com
> http://che.ojctech.com/mailman/listinfo/sdas
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace/attachments/20050905/212df5ee/attachment.htm