|
Post by molika on Sept 7, 2005 15:12:34 GMT -5
The situation in the southeast US is a tragedy. We need to pray that these victims receive help and are enabled to return to a semblance of normal life soon.
It seems to me that many hundreds of thousands of lives were in a delicate balance of existance between two earthen levees with the Gulf of Mexico on one side and a lake on the other. Levees fail, it is only a matter of time and Katrina was the catalyst. I am sure the US Army Corps of Engineers was fully aware of this.
What makes this situation unique is that many of the victims had the opportunity to evacuate and did not. This is most likely due to economics. For most of these people their homes are their one and only thing of value. Without homes, with no reliable transportation, with the high cost of other types of travel and with the uncertainty of how they would survive outside the only place they ever knew as home, did they really have a choice? There are close to 10,000 people, I believe, still trapped in their homes, most of them still unwilling to leave.
God help them.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 7, 2005 15:45:12 GMT -5
The New Orleans' looting really is unthinkable in any European city, from Lisbon to St. Petersburg. Ain't it so? Any idea about why? I think it's ridiculous to compare. I generally dislike when there are comparisons made of various situations between America and Europe, because they are many, many factors at play. It's like comparing apples and oranges. Two factors I may point out between N.O. and most European cities is that the latter is more culturally homogenous. Why is this a big deal? In a time of crisis, the division is greatly felt. Second, there is greater social and economic stratification in N.O. There are large income gaps between the lower and upper parts of the economic totem pole. When shit hits the fan, the differences that boil under the surface come to a head.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Sept 8, 2005 3:09:08 GMT -5
I think it's ridiculous to compare. I generally dislike when there are comparisons made of various situations between America and Europe, because they are many, many factors at play. It's like comparing apples and oranges. The western world is divided in North America and Europe. It is perfectly normal to compare these two entities that are the closer to each other under any point of view. Furthermore, the two entities are in competition. Actually the only way to define something is to compare it to something similar, so I really don't understand your objection. The victims and the perpetrators of the crimes look quite ethnically and economically homogeneous to me. N.O. citizens may be poor for American standards but they are rich for world standards. Likely on average they are richer than people in Latvia, Lithuania, Russia ... all places where such behaviour would be unthinkable. The fact that a relevant share of the USA's population is made up by stone age primitives such that you couldn't find their equals anywhere in Europe or Asia, is a very big deal. Take a look at the Wall Street Journal, that is proposing the USA society as the zenith and the model civilisation for the rest of the world, in opposition to the European, labelled as decadent, and then take a look at New Orleans. The USA's claim for moral leadership looks quite out of place now. And check this out, it's worse than stalinist propaganda: [ftp]http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/cRosett/?id=110007218[/ftp]
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 8, 2005 10:14:28 GMT -5
N.O. citizens may be poor for American standards but they are rich for world standards. Likely on average they are richer than people in Latvia, Lithuania, Russia ... all places where such behaviour would be unthinkable. ] Yes, I know that, but that's not the point...I said that the social and economic stratification is greater in America; in countries in Eastern Europe a lot of people are poor, but the gaps in economic status are much smaller.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 8, 2005 10:16:15 GMT -5
haha, i knew i'd mess the quoting thing up. my first reply, which i attributed to you, was :
Similar, yes...but similarity of course is in gradations....they are similar in the fact they are both part of the 'Western world,' but very different in other important factors...social and economic factors, which are most relevant, at least to the issue at hand. Don't you agree?
Might I also add, the point that the perpetrators and the victims were culturally homogenous doesn't say much. In fact, it only goes to further my point by examining an important, universal social dynamic. Why? When social and economic pressures bear upon a man, he probably will come home and take it out on his wife and/or kids. Why? He can't really take out his anger on the real source of his distress, they are a convenient target. That situation can be analogized to the one in NO. Doesn't make it right, but these are the social dynamics, and pointing this out will show you that their actions are not so foreign.
|
|
Nist
Junior Member
Posts: 58
|
Post by Nist on Sept 8, 2005 10:53:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Sept 8, 2005 11:49:30 GMT -5
Similar, yes...but similarity of course is in gradations....they are similar in the fact they are both part of the 'Western world,' but very different in other important factors...social and economic factors, which are most relevant, at least to the issue at hand. Don't you agree? Well, yes, but this was the point I wanted to make. That to have a share of the population that is so cut out from the common values of society is an anomaly in a western society, and an important weakness. I don't see a bright future for your country if this problem will not be addressed. And,as the WSJ article I posted proofs, I don't see the will to aknowledge and address it. They are for people who live in a country that is (or pretend to be) the peak of human civilisation.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 8, 2005 13:29:57 GMT -5
"Well, yes, but this was the point I wanted to make. That to have a share of the population that is so cut out from the common values of society is an anomaly in a western society, and an important weakness. I don't see a bright future for your country if this problem will not be addressed. And,as the WSJ article I posted proofs, I don't see the will to aknowledge and address it."
I wish to 'acknowledge and address" the issue at hand, by laying the blame at the correct door. I'm faulting you for attributing these issues to the wrong source byimplying that something is wrong with American moral fiber versus Europe's. If I'm misinterpreting your point, feel free to correct me.
"They are for people who live in a country that is (or pretend to be) the peak of human civilisation."
This was in response to the social dynamic I posted of displacement, which is universal to humankind. Are you going to argue that this displacement is simply an American trait?
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Sept 9, 2005 3:09:23 GMT -5
I wish to 'acknowledge and address" the issue at hand, by laying the blame at the correct door. I'm faulting you for attributing these issues to the wrong source byimplying that something is wrong with American moral fiber versus Europe's. If I'm misinterpreting your point, feel free to correct me. No, you read me correctly. I do think the problem is is the moral values (or better, in the lack of it) of too many citizens of New Orleans. My point was exactly that nowhere in Europe you would find such a a mass of barbarians. The correct door is the door of those who are raping and looting their neighbours, whose else? No I'm arguing that taking advantage of a catastrophe to rape, steal and kill is a human instinct that has been tamed by civilisation; so I repeat: nowhere else in the Western World you will find so many people in pre civilisation state.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 9, 2005 9:47:25 GMT -5
This is pathetic, nock. So far, you have not substancially responded to one claim that I have made to point out the difference to you between Eastern Europe and America...and the differences I have pointed out have nothing to do with moral fiber. If you need to re-read them, let me post them for you again. "The social and economic stratification is greater in America; in countries in Eastern Europe a lot of people are poor, but the gaps in economic status are much smaller." THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC STRATIFICATION HAS AN AFFECT SUCH AS THIS.... "Might I also add, the point that the perpetrators and the victims were culturally homogenous doesn't say much. In fact, it only goes to further my point by examining an important, universal social dynamic. Why? When social and economic pressures bear upon a man, he probably will come home and take it out on his wife and/or kids. Why? He can't really take out his anger on the real source of his distress, they are a convenient target. That situation can be analogized to the one in NO. Doesn't make it right, but these are the social dynamics, and pointing this out will show you that their actions are not so foreign." All you did in your response is repeat your first point, you responded to none of my claims. It's like arguing with a brick wall.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 9, 2005 9:49:40 GMT -5
It's obvious that you are not concerned with the facts and actual proof that I have offered, but instead concerned with justifying a prejudice that you already have.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Sept 9, 2005 10:07:19 GMT -5
"The social and economic stratification is greater in America; in countries in Eastern Europe a lot of people are poor, but the gaps in economic status are much smaller." THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC STRATIFICATION HAS AN AFFECT SUCH AS THIS.... "Might I also add, the point that the perpetrators and the victims were culturally homogenous doesn't say much. In fact, it only goes to further my point by examining an important, universal social dynamic. Why? When social and economic pressures bear upon a man, he probably will come home and take it out on his wife and/or kids. Why? He can't really take out his anger on the real source of his distress, they are a convenient target. That situation can be analogized to the one in NO. Doesn't make it right, but these are the social dynamics, and pointing this out will show you that their actions are not so foreign." So you mean that if in a country there are 20% well off persons and 80% bill gates, the former will become cannibals and eat their family? Why should what you say be true, what proves it? Also, consider that in Eastern Europe there is a huge disparity between the "new riches" (who are filthy rich) and the rest, who are very poor. A much more meaningful difference than in the states, where no one is really poor. And consider Europe at the beginning of 1900: the differences in income, and even in individual rights recognised by the law, were much bigger than in the States now. Yet, there is no recollection of people descending into primitive habits. Add to this that the differences you are talking about are of small relevance, for the obvious reason of marginal benefits. The richer is the nation, the LESS important differences in income are. In poorer nations, difference means eating or not eating. In the USA the poor are fat. In other words, your theory that everyone in presence of a big wealth difference will became a savage a) is not grounded; 2) does not apply as there are not such big differences in the place we are talking of 3) even if it was credible, which is not, would not affect the problem that wathever the reason for their savagery, savages are there just the same.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 9, 2005 10:37:34 GMT -5
"So you mean that if in a country there are 20% well off persons and 80% bill gates, the former will become cannibals and eat their family? Why should what you say be true, what proves it? Also, consider that in Eastern Europe there is a huge disparity between the "new riches" (who are filthy rich) and the rest, who are very poor. A much more meaningful difference than in the states, where no one is really poor. And consider Europe at the beginning of 1900: the differences in income, and even in individual rights recognised by the law, were much bigger than in the States now. Yet, there is no recollection of people descending into primitive habits."
Now you are really getting desperate. There are no substanciated claims of 'cannabalism'. Don't resort to ridiculous hyperbole to make a point. You know that there is greater economic stratification in the U.S. and Eastern Europe. Is that what you need proof of? And primitive habits? What? Stealing during a crises? I reiterate, don't resort to hyperbole to make a point.
"In other words, your theory that everyone in presence of a big wealth difference will became a savage a) is not grounded; 2) does not apply as there are not such big differences in the place we are talking of 3) even if it was credible, which is not, would not affect the problem that wathever the reason for their savagery, savages are there just the same."
Re-read my post on the displacement theory again. It says nothing about 'savagery.' Stop making things up. Are you saying that displacement is not credible? It's a easily observable phenomena. You seem to be neglecting that the majority of the victims in NO are law abiding people that are suffering. Funny that that doesn't grasp your attention more than a few that made a fool of themselves. You make an abstract claim about 'moral fiber' and you expect that not to be challenged? The reasons I have given have solid, more objective grounds, which is more than I can say for you and your 'moral fiber'.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Sept 9, 2005 10:41:23 GMT -5
Perhaps you should take an introductory psychology course? Learned about displacement in mine.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Sept 9, 2005 11:15:31 GMT -5
Now you are really getting desperate. There are no substanciated claims of 'cannabalism'. Don't resort to ridiculous hyperbole to make a point. Ever heard about reductio ad absurdum? Maybe you should take an introductory course in logic. You meant "than" in Eastern Europe? Sorry but otherwise I can not understand what you are saying (seriously, I'm not teasing). Yes I think there is greater disparity in Eastern Europe than in the USA, and that such disparity is more relevant for the law of marginal benefits, as said above. So what you say should be more true for Eastrern Europe but isn't. I, plus some others nut cases as The Times of London etc, am talking about savagery. It's obvious I refer to the stealing, brawling, shooting at the rescuers, raping, indimidating etc. that's going on, not to the people who took what necessary to survive. I don't. Is that the number of the looters is too high compared to what would be in any other developed (and many underdeveloped) nations in the same situation. I know most of the people in NO are NOT looters, otherwise it would be impossible to have a city there. Do you read the international press? It' seems I'm not the only one impressed. Sorry, but "I learned this in school so it's true" is not an argument that can hold water in any debate.
|
|