Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Ask Not For Whom The Bell Tolls
The FDNY rushed to W 43rd St. this afternoon, hurrying to place safety nets at the base of the New York Times Building in order to protect passersby from Times staffers distraught over receiving pink slips. After discussion with former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the nets were removed and blockades were placed to prevent access to the sidewalks by pedestrians. Former Mayor Giuliani cited concerns relating to potential liability issues arising from Times staffers who might survive a landing on the nets as the reason for the removal. Current NYC Mayor Bloomberg could not be reached for comment.
Kerry-Edwards Infiniti
A friend has a neighbor who just bought a brand new car. The neighbor moved over the car seat, his coffee mug, and his Kerry-Edwards '04 bumper sticker from his old car. His comfort items. Why, my friend asks, would he move over his Kerry-Edwards bumper sticker? Doesn't he know the election is over?
My friend thinks the neighbor doesn't believe the election is over. He thinks it's still going on. The neighbor's team can still win! The "win" by Bush was either a farce or a fraud or a case of nationally shared delusion.
Are Republicans truly the only party of the adults? Isn't this a little crazy?
My friend thinks the neighbor doesn't believe the election is over. He thinks it's still going on. The neighbor's team can still win! The "win" by Bush was either a farce or a fraud or a case of nationally shared delusion.
Are Republicans truly the only party of the adults? Isn't this a little crazy?
Katrina - Three Weeks On - Update
I received an email from Skookumchuk and have received his permission to post it. He was heavily involved in the Katrina response and provides a deeper level of insight than those looking on from the outside could ever have.
Yes, Rick, it was a success. We were talking about 65,000 dead prior to landfall. A week into it, we bought 22,000 body bags and leased many refrigerated vans to serve as portable morgues. So what we have seen thus far has been a great relief. It was made possible by a lot of very, very hard work and a bit of luck.
Congressional committees, ugh.
Now, somewhat OT, here are a few things that have not received much attention.
Here are some lessons to be learned, not that you will hear these discussed in any depth in the MSM.
The largest single failing on a Federal level is the divided chain of command in Federal disaster response. That is a function of FEMA’s size – only about 2,400 full time employees and about 10,000 or so reservists, some of whom are well-equipped while others are not. FEMA needs other and much larger agencies to do its bidding, like the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Transportation, GSA, and the Forest Service. In practice this means that an order for transportation services or supplies or a purchase may take many hours and many scattered people to accomplish. The system normally does work, but these organizational impediments are overcome only through an enormous and unseen expenditure of energy during a major disaster. Other entities, like the Army, may not be quite so encumbered. In principle, FEMA could avoid some of this by doing more itself, growing perhaps to a Coast Guard sized agency of about 30,000 well-trained people, plus a true reserve based on the military reserves. Alternatively, FEMA could have employees of these other agencies seconded to it on a permanent basis, making them a true team. But both options carry costs that we have thus far been unwilling to pay.
Another frequently unmentioned problem for FEMA – a major problem, at least as great as that mentioned above - is the tension between Washington and the various regional commands of the organization. At base, FEMA is a mechanism for transferring monies and services from the Federal government to the States. FEMA also subsidizes training and other programs for first responders at a local level. Close coordination between the States and the regional bureaucracies of FEMA is obviously vital to any disaster response. This means that the FEMA regional commands are where the action is – where the money and the good people are - and these regions have considerable autonomy from DC. In fact, as a disaster progresses, control shifts from FEMA HQ to local FEMA authorities. When you add this command and control shift to the fact that FEMA itself has to work with so many other agencies, you get an overly complicated situation. I don’t see this being addressed either.
However, the role of the Feds should not be over-emphasized. As has been mentioned elsewhere, all disaster response is really local. The Feds are largely conduits for money and resources. A State that plans well, Mississippi or Florida, say, that lets the Feds know what they want and where and when they want it – will come out ahead. And a State that for whatever reason can’t plan will lose. No matter how good the Feds may be.
So. If your local firemen and cops and city management seem competent, you might pull through OK. If they ain’t, you might want to move. Or start working on making them better.
A few more thoughts. Are we more or less prepared than our grandparents? Put another way, is the young woman in her Manhattan apartment with a refrigerator containing two Stouffer’s Lean Cuisines and a carton of cherry tomatoes better or worse off than her great grandmother, with a pantry full of home-canned vegetables? Specifically, a “just in time” manufacturing and distribution system tends to remove the buffer that existed in previous times – but it also makes it much easier to move product around to areas that need it. Are we better off or worse off as a result? Well, we are both, actually, though we know little about this. Not too much attention has been given to this one, except by a few folks including your humble servant.
A semi-private response system, say a larger FEMA with more skilled and highly trained people working as a true team and contracting the Wal-Marts and Home Depots and UPSes, might be a good start. Don’t hold your breath, but that is what we really need. But such recommendations probably won’t come from a Congressional committee.
Skookumchuk
Yes, Rick, it was a success. We were talking about 65,000 dead prior to landfall. A week into it, we bought 22,000 body bags and leased many refrigerated vans to serve as portable morgues. So what we have seen thus far has been a great relief. It was made possible by a lot of very, very hard work and a bit of luck.
Congressional committees, ugh.
Now, somewhat OT, here are a few things that have not received much attention.
Here are some lessons to be learned, not that you will hear these discussed in any depth in the MSM.
The largest single failing on a Federal level is the divided chain of command in Federal disaster response. That is a function of FEMA’s size – only about 2,400 full time employees and about 10,000 or so reservists, some of whom are well-equipped while others are not. FEMA needs other and much larger agencies to do its bidding, like the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Transportation, GSA, and the Forest Service. In practice this means that an order for transportation services or supplies or a purchase may take many hours and many scattered people to accomplish. The system normally does work, but these organizational impediments are overcome only through an enormous and unseen expenditure of energy during a major disaster. Other entities, like the Army, may not be quite so encumbered. In principle, FEMA could avoid some of this by doing more itself, growing perhaps to a Coast Guard sized agency of about 30,000 well-trained people, plus a true reserve based on the military reserves. Alternatively, FEMA could have employees of these other agencies seconded to it on a permanent basis, making them a true team. But both options carry costs that we have thus far been unwilling to pay.
Another frequently unmentioned problem for FEMA – a major problem, at least as great as that mentioned above - is the tension between Washington and the various regional commands of the organization. At base, FEMA is a mechanism for transferring monies and services from the Federal government to the States. FEMA also subsidizes training and other programs for first responders at a local level. Close coordination between the States and the regional bureaucracies of FEMA is obviously vital to any disaster response. This means that the FEMA regional commands are where the action is – where the money and the good people are - and these regions have considerable autonomy from DC. In fact, as a disaster progresses, control shifts from FEMA HQ to local FEMA authorities. When you add this command and control shift to the fact that FEMA itself has to work with so many other agencies, you get an overly complicated situation. I don’t see this being addressed either.
However, the role of the Feds should not be over-emphasized. As has been mentioned elsewhere, all disaster response is really local. The Feds are largely conduits for money and resources. A State that plans well, Mississippi or Florida, say, that lets the Feds know what they want and where and when they want it – will come out ahead. And a State that for whatever reason can’t plan will lose. No matter how good the Feds may be.
So. If your local firemen and cops and city management seem competent, you might pull through OK. If they ain’t, you might want to move. Or start working on making them better.
A few more thoughts. Are we more or less prepared than our grandparents? Put another way, is the young woman in her Manhattan apartment with a refrigerator containing two Stouffer’s Lean Cuisines and a carton of cherry tomatoes better or worse off than her great grandmother, with a pantry full of home-canned vegetables? Specifically, a “just in time” manufacturing and distribution system tends to remove the buffer that existed in previous times – but it also makes it much easier to move product around to areas that need it. Are we better off or worse off as a result? Well, we are both, actually, though we know little about this. Not too much attention has been given to this one, except by a few folks including your humble servant.
A semi-private response system, say a larger FEMA with more skilled and highly trained people working as a true team and contracting the Wal-Marts and Home Depots and UPSes, might be a good start. Don’t hold your breath, but that is what we really need. But such recommendations probably won’t come from a Congressional committee.
Skookumchuk
Dum spiro porko?
Glenn Reynolds is touting a new campaign against federal pork. The US is undoubtedly spending an extraordinary amount of money in the War on Al Qaeda while simultaneously suffering from what is already one of the 10 worst natural disasters in American history. Opponents of George Bush lost no time, once Katrina hit, in linking the two events. There was certainty in their minds that the levees in New Orleans would have been rebuilt had the war not taken us into Iraq. Having scrutinized the plans by the Army Corps of Engineers, there was considerable doubt in mine. Now supporters of the war seem to be firing back by pointing out that there remains beaucoup money to be saved elsewhere.
Which there no doubt is. The list of identified pork projects garnered here provides some sobering reading.
My heart is with Professor Reynolds: a highway bill should fund highways rather than museums, drug programs, bus terminals, etc. My head doubts I will live to see such a day. Porkopolis has long hence outgrown all boundaries of self-restraint. So I wonder, is there any conceivable way short of the collapse of the Republic that this voracious beast can be tamed? Does anyone seriously believe that hope can once again triumph over pork?
Which there no doubt is. The list of identified pork projects garnered here provides some sobering reading.
My heart is with Professor Reynolds: a highway bill should fund highways rather than museums, drug programs, bus terminals, etc. My head doubts I will live to see such a day. Porkopolis has long hence outgrown all boundaries of self-restraint. So I wonder, is there any conceivable way short of the collapse of the Republic that this voracious beast can be tamed? Does anyone seriously believe that hope can once again triumph over pork?
Monday, September 19, 2005
Katrina Three Weeks On
Three weeks ago at just about this time everyone was breathing a sigh of relief. Katrina had narrowly missed New Orleans and serious damage seemed confined to the southern parishes and the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Conditions within the Superdome had not grown intolerable at that point - at least there weren't any reports of violence on Sunday night.
Then two canal walls gave out, New Orleans flooded and what was at that point a "regular" hurricane disaster, albeit a very harsh one, became the political football of 2005. It is indisputable that Federal resources were being used beginning Tuesday morning to effectuate harrowing rescues on a continuous basis. The USCG performed magnificently all day Tuesday and was joined by other Federal resources on Wednesday. Never in history had more people been plucked to safety by helicopter than were so saved between Tuesday and Friday. LANG units were involved in rescue operations continuously beginning Tuesday morning all over southern Lousiana - except for New Orleans. The Red Cross and Salvation Army were hard at work accross the Gulf Coast providing emergency services on a vast scale and performing heroically - except in New Orleans, where Gov. Blanco refused entry to them and to the supplies which they had on hand and could have provided to the people in the Superdome and Convention Center.
As yet there has been little reportage as to the scope and success of the rescue efforts mounted Tuesday and continuing until just a few days ago. The fact that it appears at this point that the total death toll will be less than 1,000 has received little notice, even though the emergency exercise conducted by FEMA in 2004 predicted a death toll of between 10,000 and 50,000 should New Orleans be struck as it was by Katrina. Instead there has been a tireless effort on the part of the MSM to portray what was an outstanding success by any objective measure as an abject failure on the part of the Federal government and in particular upon the part of President Bush. A story of high human interest with many heroes has been spun into a sordid political tale - including a silly attempt on the part of the usual suspects to exonerate an incompetent mayor and a criminally negligent governor who may well have been acting on advice received from other Democratic politicians.
It is my contention that the only venue for a complete exploration of Katrina is a House investigatory committee. The Democrats have rejected a joint House-Senate panel and I do not believe that a commission would be anything but laughable at this point. I further believe that it would be an act of negligence on the part of the House if they do not to convene such an investigation.
I would be interested in hearing the opinions of others on this matter.
*Edited for clarification 9/20
Thanks, Flenser & Knucklehead.
Then two canal walls gave out, New Orleans flooded and what was at that point a "regular" hurricane disaster, albeit a very harsh one, became the political football of 2005. It is indisputable that Federal resources were being used beginning Tuesday morning to effectuate harrowing rescues on a continuous basis. The USCG performed magnificently all day Tuesday and was joined by other Federal resources on Wednesday. Never in history had more people been plucked to safety by helicopter than were so saved between Tuesday and Friday. LANG units were involved in rescue operations continuously beginning Tuesday morning all over southern Lousiana - except for New Orleans. The Red Cross and Salvation Army were hard at work accross the Gulf Coast providing emergency services on a vast scale and performing heroically - except in New Orleans, where Gov. Blanco refused entry to them and to the supplies which they had on hand and could have provided to the people in the Superdome and Convention Center.
As yet there has been little reportage as to the scope and success of the rescue efforts mounted Tuesday and continuing until just a few days ago. The fact that it appears at this point that the total death toll will be less than 1,000 has received little notice, even though the emergency exercise conducted by FEMA in 2004 predicted a death toll of between 10,000 and 50,000 should New Orleans be struck as it was by Katrina. Instead there has been a tireless effort on the part of the MSM to portray what was an outstanding success by any objective measure as an abject failure on the part of the Federal government and in particular upon the part of President Bush. A story of high human interest with many heroes has been spun into a sordid political tale - including a silly attempt on the part of the usual suspects to exonerate an incompetent mayor and a criminally negligent governor who may well have been acting on advice received from other Democratic politicians.
It is my contention that the only venue for a complete exploration of Katrina is a House investigatory committee. The Democrats have rejected a joint House-Senate panel and I do not believe that a commission would be anything but laughable at this point. I further believe that it would be an act of negligence on the part of the House if they do not to convene such an investigation.
I would be interested in hearing the opinions of others on this matter.
*Edited for clarification 9/20
Thanks, Flenser & Knucklehead.
Yesterday's Elections
Two elections were held yesterday, one in Germany and one in Afghanistan. The results in Germany appear to signal a slight shift to the right but not so much of a shift as to provided dispositive proof of significant change. It will be moderately interesting to watch the coalition form but it seems safe to say that substantive change will not occur. Germany's love affair with EU regulatory mercantilism will continue and high unemployment and economic stagnation will continue to flourish as the bastard children of the torrid affair. Germany appears not yet ready to face reality and cannot be considered reliable as an ally in any useful sense.
We won't know the results in Afghanistan for a few weeks so it is impossible to form any judgement as to the outcome. Except that "one man, one vote, one time" is no longer applicable to at least one Muslim country in southwest Asia. If the Afghans hold another election on schedule prior to Pakistan, it will have proven to be more democratic than its neighbor. Now that's an interesting thought.
There are two more elections of interest coming up. The Iraqi referendum in mid-October and finally (should the referendum pass) the Iraqi vote in January. Should those elections come to pass without serious problems (and I believe they will) then the light that appears to be flickering throughout Europe will be shining brightly in lands that had known only darkness for the past thirty years.
We won't know the results in Afghanistan for a few weeks so it is impossible to form any judgement as to the outcome. Except that "one man, one vote, one time" is no longer applicable to at least one Muslim country in southwest Asia. If the Afghans hold another election on schedule prior to Pakistan, it will have proven to be more democratic than its neighbor. Now that's an interesting thought.
There are two more elections of interest coming up. The Iraqi referendum in mid-October and finally (should the referendum pass) the Iraqi vote in January. Should those elections come to pass without serious problems (and I believe they will) then the light that appears to be flickering throughout Europe will be shining brightly in lands that had known only darkness for the past thirty years.
Pulitzer Countdown
How long, my son asks, until the Pulitzer Prize will be awarded to a blogger? He guesses 2015 will be the first one.
Walkabout
Just awalkin' the dog
I feel a need to get on the board here. Just curious... Are any of y'all prone to going walkabout or make a habit of taking a walk? The dog owners among us, at least the less rural ones, might be more likely to have some standard time and route for daily walks.
If you do take walks, aside from the health aspects, what do you like most about walking? This is a relatively recent development for me after many years of ignoring it. I made a habit of occasionally wandering around or specifically taking long walks through wherever I happened to be in my earlier days, but ignored this in my more "stable" or sedentary years. I've just recently restarted (the past three years).
As for me, I enjoy reconnecting with the passing and changing seasons. The odors, the sounds, differences in daylight, weather, etc. I also enjoy playing a bit of "recon", noticing changes in the neighborhood and like to make a point of being outside in the dark and just listening and observing who and what comes and goes. One might, for example, never know there were skunks around unless one wanders outside at night.
Like I said, just curious about which of us are fans of walkabouts.
I feel a need to get on the board here. Just curious... Are any of y'all prone to going walkabout or make a habit of taking a walk? The dog owners among us, at least the less rural ones, might be more likely to have some standard time and route for daily walks.
If you do take walks, aside from the health aspects, what do you like most about walking? This is a relatively recent development for me after many years of ignoring it. I made a habit of occasionally wandering around or specifically taking long walks through wherever I happened to be in my earlier days, but ignored this in my more "stable" or sedentary years. I've just recently restarted (the past three years).
As for me, I enjoy reconnecting with the passing and changing seasons. The odors, the sounds, differences in daylight, weather, etc. I also enjoy playing a bit of "recon", noticing changes in the neighborhood and like to make a point of being outside in the dark and just listening and observing who and what comes and goes. One might, for example, never know there were skunks around unless one wanders outside at night.
Like I said, just curious about which of us are fans of walkabouts.
Sunday, September 18, 2005
The Wreck Of The Medusa
Sub category, book review.
I'm interested in hearing what the rest of you consider worth reading, and I hope that book recommendations will become a fairly regular feature here.
The The Wreck of the Medusa , by Alexander McKee, describes the disaster that befell the crew and passengers of the French warship Medusa when it ran aground off the coast of Africa in 1816. Due to incompetence on the part of those in leadership positions, 150 men and one woman were placed on a raft which was then set adrift. Two weeks later, fifteen of them were rescued, after going through what might be called indescribable suffering, except that McKee describes it in painstaking detail.
For the first day or two those on the raft maintained a degree of unity, but after that civilization crumbled quickly, and murder, cannibalism and mass insanity broke out.
The book closes with an examination of similar disasters, examines the psychological affects on those involved, and discusses the different ways groups of people react to high stress situations. Although he does not spend a great deal of time on the topic, McKee suggests that group cohesion is an important factor in surviving a disaster.
I'm interested in hearing what the rest of you consider worth reading, and I hope that book recommendations will become a fairly regular feature here.
The The Wreck of the Medusa , by Alexander McKee, describes the disaster that befell the crew and passengers of the French warship Medusa when it ran aground off the coast of Africa in 1816. Due to incompetence on the part of those in leadership positions, 150 men and one woman were placed on a raft which was then set adrift. Two weeks later, fifteen of them were rescued, after going through what might be called indescribable suffering, except that McKee describes it in painstaking detail.
For the first day or two those on the raft maintained a degree of unity, but after that civilization crumbled quickly, and murder, cannibalism and mass insanity broke out.
The book closes with an examination of similar disasters, examines the psychological affects on those involved, and discusses the different ways groups of people react to high stress situations. Although he does not spend a great deal of time on the topic, McKee suggests that group cohesion is an important factor in surviving a disaster.
Canadian Confusion
I never knew much about Canada growing up. I loved "Rocky and Bullwinkle" and knew William Shatner was from Canada, and later I bought Raffi tapes for my kids to listen to, but that was about it.
As an adult I once drove across the lower part of Ontario from Detroit to Niagara Falls and I watched Canadian television one evening. Which I found passing strange. The news was naturally in both English and French but the worlds being portrayed on these two channels might as well have been in different countries. The French Canadian news was all about what was happening in Paris. Ok....? The English news was a panel discussion led by a fellow who seemed to be of Indian descent. The panel was all in agreement that things had been much better when Canada was a direct part of the British Empire. In both cases, the longing for a lost Europe hit me like a 2 by 4. No American longs for Europe. America is about standing up for yourself and "having the courage to get up and do what needs to be done". What's Canada about? One clue came from the radio: there were several programs which seemed to be dedicated to complaining about "our neighbor to the South", inevitably enunciated with that fearful but superior sneer with which members of Old Families will discuss parvenus.
More evidence has come in the last couple of years. My company bought a Canadian company and I took my first overnight trip to Ottawa, which I liked a lot. It looked very much like a nice Midwestern city. I enjoyed listening to the French radio--what a treat!, I thought. But when I talked to the English-speaking employees I discovered that, although they had been required to take French for twelve years, not a one of them had the least interest in speaking or learning more French. And these are people who live in a city which is one third French-speaking. They didn't sneer when I asked about French, but they did express the closest thing to a sneer which that peculiar social restraint I associate with well-bred British people, but which I now know to be a trait of the English-speaking Canadians, will allow.
My final experience came a few weeks ago when we drove to Vancouver on the family vacation. Coming to the border we picked up a French-speaking station and a Cantonese-speaking station on the car radio. I couldn't understand the Cantonese station. The French-speaking station had five or so people in a panel discussion who were complaining about Walmart. Their comment was that "Canada is different". Vancouver itself, however, seems to have little or no French-speaking part (other than official government business). Rather, it has a huge part which is Cantonese-speaking, Hong Kong II. Yet when I found myself that night in a hospital emergency ward, all the signs were in both English and Bengali. What gives? Will Cantonese become the official second language in fifty years?
Canada is very confused about its identity. Mainly, its identity consists of being multi-culti-er than thou, and we all know who "thou" is. Will the real Canada please stand up? Or perhaps I should say, Can it?
As an adult I once drove across the lower part of Ontario from Detroit to Niagara Falls and I watched Canadian television one evening. Which I found passing strange. The news was naturally in both English and French but the worlds being portrayed on these two channels might as well have been in different countries. The French Canadian news was all about what was happening in Paris. Ok....? The English news was a panel discussion led by a fellow who seemed to be of Indian descent. The panel was all in agreement that things had been much better when Canada was a direct part of the British Empire. In both cases, the longing for a lost Europe hit me like a 2 by 4. No American longs for Europe. America is about standing up for yourself and "having the courage to get up and do what needs to be done". What's Canada about? One clue came from the radio: there were several programs which seemed to be dedicated to complaining about "our neighbor to the South", inevitably enunciated with that fearful but superior sneer with which members of Old Families will discuss parvenus.
More evidence has come in the last couple of years. My company bought a Canadian company and I took my first overnight trip to Ottawa, which I liked a lot. It looked very much like a nice Midwestern city. I enjoyed listening to the French radio--what a treat!, I thought. But when I talked to the English-speaking employees I discovered that, although they had been required to take French for twelve years, not a one of them had the least interest in speaking or learning more French. And these are people who live in a city which is one third French-speaking. They didn't sneer when I asked about French, but they did express the closest thing to a sneer which that peculiar social restraint I associate with well-bred British people, but which I now know to be a trait of the English-speaking Canadians, will allow.
My final experience came a few weeks ago when we drove to Vancouver on the family vacation. Coming to the border we picked up a French-speaking station and a Cantonese-speaking station on the car radio. I couldn't understand the Cantonese station. The French-speaking station had five or so people in a panel discussion who were complaining about Walmart. Their comment was that "Canada is different". Vancouver itself, however, seems to have little or no French-speaking part (other than official government business). Rather, it has a huge part which is Cantonese-speaking, Hong Kong II. Yet when I found myself that night in a hospital emergency ward, all the signs were in both English and Bengali. What gives? Will Cantonese become the official second language in fifty years?
Canada is very confused about its identity. Mainly, its identity consists of being multi-culti-er than thou, and we all know who "thou" is. Will the real Canada please stand up? Or perhaps I should say, Can it?
Saturday, September 17, 2005
Dismayed by the Economist today
I got home from a trip to DC today, picked up the new Economist, and read a load of malarkey about the racist attitudes of Texans and how they are bound to complicate the attempt to help victims of Katrina (I guess with lynchings and cross-burnings). With all due respect, I don't think the Economist understands the American South at all.
I used to live in Baton Rouge, having grown up in the Northeast, and I discovered when I lived there that Southern racism wasn't quite as simple as I'd thought it was. If you look really carefully at some of the 'lifestyle' reportage about Katrina's aftermath, you can see the complexity of the relationship between the races in the south lurking.
I read an article the other day about a couple of families that survived Hurricane Katrina together. They were in the ICU in one of the flooded hospitals, with very sick relatives awaiting transplants. When the fire department came to get them out, they told the families that they had orders to bring out the patients most likely to survive first, putting the transplant patients at the bottom of the list. The wife of one transplant patient and the mother of the other stuck by the patients, and the rescue efforts went on without them.
Later, the (Indian, by the way) doctor and a couple of his staff members apparently commandeered a boat, siphoned some gas, and went back to get the patients out. The wife and mother had managed to keep them alive by themselves (the wife by ventilating her husband by hand). Both patients survived, although the daughter has not been able to find a liver and is continuing to sicken.
There was a photo of the wife and mother who stuck it out, hugging each other. The mother looked deeply sad; the wife looked relieved, since her husband was improving. The families were visible in the background. The mother and her ill daughter were black; the other couple was mixed-race and the wife was white.
This is so typical of what I saw while I lived in Louisiana; the races live together. They are in the same hospitals, the same colleges, the same coffee shops, and they marry each other. Whether or not they particularly like or trust the other race, they are real people to each other. It's not like that in the northeast where I grew up. All too often, the blacks live off by themselves; they don't have middle class jobs and the races don't encounter each other in the course of living. There is a lot more fear there .
I'm not saying the south has no racism problem; it's just not as cut and dried as northerners think it is. However "white Republican Texans" feel about black southerners, when they help the poorest victims of Katrina, they are helping their own people, and they know it.
I used to live in Baton Rouge, having grown up in the Northeast, and I discovered when I lived there that Southern racism wasn't quite as simple as I'd thought it was. If you look really carefully at some of the 'lifestyle' reportage about Katrina's aftermath, you can see the complexity of the relationship between the races in the south lurking.
I read an article the other day about a couple of families that survived Hurricane Katrina together. They were in the ICU in one of the flooded hospitals, with very sick relatives awaiting transplants. When the fire department came to get them out, they told the families that they had orders to bring out the patients most likely to survive first, putting the transplant patients at the bottom of the list. The wife of one transplant patient and the mother of the other stuck by the patients, and the rescue efforts went on without them.
Later, the (Indian, by the way) doctor and a couple of his staff members apparently commandeered a boat, siphoned some gas, and went back to get the patients out. The wife and mother had managed to keep them alive by themselves (the wife by ventilating her husband by hand). Both patients survived, although the daughter has not been able to find a liver and is continuing to sicken.
There was a photo of the wife and mother who stuck it out, hugging each other. The mother looked deeply sad; the wife looked relieved, since her husband was improving. The families were visible in the background. The mother and her ill daughter were black; the other couple was mixed-race and the wife was white.
This is so typical of what I saw while I lived in Louisiana; the races live together. They are in the same hospitals, the same colleges, the same coffee shops, and they marry each other. Whether or not they particularly like or trust the other race, they are real people to each other. It's not like that in the northeast where I grew up. All too often, the blacks live off by themselves; they don't have middle class jobs and the races don't encounter each other in the course of living. There is a lot more fear there .
I'm not saying the south has no racism problem; it's just not as cut and dried as northerners think it is. However "white Republican Texans" feel about black southerners, when they help the poorest victims of Katrina, they are helping their own people, and they know it.
Why Does America Work?
I just came across this article by Mark Steyn, in which he discusses the hoariness of the American Constitution. The British writer Jonathan Freedland wrote a book praising the American Constitution, but after Gore's defeat he was so horrified at its actual workings that he ended up "trashing the very system he spent hundreds of pages rhapsodising". In all fairness to Freedland, he was writing for The Guardian.
Steyn's rejoinder is another classic.
But that begs the question: why do we do so well?
When I was young, All The Kids knew the answer. It was because we were blessed (unfairly of course) by natural resouces. Natural resources were the source of wealth, we had more than our share, the only reasonable path forward was for us to be forced to share our wealth with all the poor people around the globe. Plus we had stolen our resources from the Indians anyway so we had no real right to them.
That theory kinda went into the toilet during the Japanese Eighties. It became rather apparent that a country having no natural resources could become enormously wealthy in a very short time. It became apparent that there is something about the social structure of a country which makes it wealthy. Or not.
What is that something? What is the elusive "quantity x" which makes America, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, etc. rich, while Mexico, most African countries, and the arab countries sans oil wealth are dirt poor?
Steyn's rejoinder is another classic.
Americans' misguided attachment to this yellowing parchment may explain why, for the past century, they've lagged so far behind in technological innovation, economic performance, military prowess, cultural influence, etc. Maybe if America's governors all went on a retreat somewhere - Nice, say - and held private sessions behind closed doors and then informed their respective electorates what they'd decided to inflict on them, things would work out a lot better.
But that begs the question: why do we do so well?
When I was young, All The Kids knew the answer. It was because we were blessed (unfairly of course) by natural resouces. Natural resources were the source of wealth, we had more than our share, the only reasonable path forward was for us to be forced to share our wealth with all the poor people around the globe. Plus we had stolen our resources from the Indians anyway so we had no real right to them.
That theory kinda went into the toilet during the Japanese Eighties. It became rather apparent that a country having no natural resources could become enormously wealthy in a very short time. It became apparent that there is something about the social structure of a country which makes it wealthy. Or not.
What is that something? What is the elusive "quantity x" which makes America, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, etc. rich, while Mexico, most African countries, and the arab countries sans oil wealth are dirt poor?
Antarctic Ice Melting?
I was fortunate enough today to have the opportunity to listen to one of the world's foremost experts give a lecture on Antarctica. His subject was ice. Everyone wants to know if it's melting. The area is so fraught with politics that it's almost impossible to discuss it, let alone study it honestly.
This man is an honest man and he showed us the very latest known results.
The evidence is still tenuous, we still don't have good sensors for all the measurements, and the models are still feeble. Nonetheless, there do seem to be some specific patterns developing. Envelope please....
At the edges, the Antarctic Ice Shelf seems to have lost 0.8% of its mass since the Sixties. On the other hand, there appears to be a buildup of ice in the middle of the continent. In between, the situation appears to be more or less stable.
Those are the best known facts at the present moment.
Intelligence and Governance
Charles Murray has an article up at Commentary that examines what strongly appear to be innate differences in intelligence between men and women and between races. I cannot speak to the accuracy of the evidence presented but am accepting its veracity, arguendo. Dr. Murray quotes Steven Pinker thus “Equality is not the empirical claim that all groups of humans are interchangeable; it is the moral principle that individuals should not be judged or constrained by the average properties of their group.” While I agree with the quote, my understanding of “All men are created equal” applied to man’s status before God and before man’s law as well as in the manner that Pinker proposes.
Acceptance of the fact of innate differences has some potential for positive impact on educational policy issues. I’m not sure that a return to the two-track system is possible (or even desirable) but perhaps a cessation of the “dumbing down” process could occur. The current leveling process has been employed in the MSE for at least twenty years and has diminished the value of a high school diploma to the point where it is regarded as a simple award for showing up for school. Meanwhile, many businesses spend an extraordinary amount of time and money in remedial training to bring the average HS graduate up to a trainable level. It’s another hidden tax.
Can the fact of innate differences even be presented to the public in discussion? The Harvard faculty reaction to President Summer’s remarks and his subsequent expenditure of $50MM to quell the storm suggests not. I haven’t seen much on this article to date and I’m curious as to the reaction of the poster’s here both to the article and to the proposition that it is an appropriate subject for public discussion.
Acceptance of the fact of innate differences has some potential for positive impact on educational policy issues. I’m not sure that a return to the two-track system is possible (or even desirable) but perhaps a cessation of the “dumbing down” process could occur. The current leveling process has been employed in the MSE for at least twenty years and has diminished the value of a high school diploma to the point where it is regarded as a simple award for showing up for school. Meanwhile, many businesses spend an extraordinary amount of time and money in remedial training to bring the average HS graduate up to a trainable level. It’s another hidden tax.
Can the fact of innate differences even be presented to the public in discussion? The Harvard faculty reaction to President Summer’s remarks and his subsequent expenditure of $50MM to quell the storm suggests not. I haven’t seen much on this article to date and I’m curious as to the reaction of the poster’s here both to the article and to the proposition that it is an appropriate subject for public discussion.
Friday, September 16, 2005
Welcome to Yet Another Really Great Blog!
Have you ever considered the power of the first post? The one that sets the tone for everything else? In a short while it becomes impossible to undo what was already done with the first one.
I almost started it off with a political post. But I don't want this to be a political blog (although politics is perfectly acceptable). And I don't want to set the whole tone. It's a group blog, for goodness' sake! A huge one at that. So, I'm leaving it neutral, passing the baton.
I herewith dedicate our new group blog. Post away!
I almost started it off with a political post. But I don't want this to be a political blog (although politics is perfectly acceptable). And I don't want to set the whole tone. It's a group blog, for goodness' sake! A huge one at that. So, I'm leaving it neutral, passing the baton.
I herewith dedicate our new group blog. Post away!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)