Haiti is New Orleans part 2
Anon
Posts: 11,175
Agree or disagree? I'm not trying to make this political.
Iran gets huge earthquakes where tens of thousands die and you don't see this kind of chaos, same with China. There wasn't this kind of looting and rioting in Thailand.
It has me curious. It can't have anything to do with being poor because I pretty sure the latter mentioned countries have residents that live in poverty. I also don't believe it has to do with population density either.
Either way if nothing else this should make someone evaluate your own preparedness. You never know.
Iran gets huge earthquakes where tens of thousands die and you don't see this kind of chaos, same with China. There wasn't this kind of looting and rioting in Thailand.
It has me curious. It can't have anything to do with being poor because I pretty sure the latter mentioned countries have residents that live in poverty. I also don't believe it has to do with population density either.
Either way if nothing else this should make someone evaluate your own preparedness. You never know.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/15/t ... i.katrina/
Haiti is not Katrina
By Kathleen Tierney, Special to CNN
Boulder, Colorado (CNN) -- The media have begun to make comparisons between Hurricane Katrina and the earthquake in Haiti. And in some ways, the two events are comparable.
Like Katrina, the earthquake has produced effects of catastrophic proportions. Both events rank among the largest catastrophes ever experienced in the Western Hemisphere.
They both have resulted in large loss of life and immense human suffering and make the coordination of emergency resources extremely difficult. Ordinary citizens are left to fend for themselves in the wreckage. And as we saw in Katrina and see now in Haiti, residents of disaster-stricken areas are the true first responders.
The aftermath of such catastrophes brings more prolonged suffering and massive recovery challenges. People pay attention as the media cover them, but they turn their attention elsewhere when the cameras leave, even though many of the real challenges that victims and affected regions face emerge later. Like the Gulf region, Haiti will struggle for years and perhaps decades to rebuild and recover.
But there, the comparisons end.
To get an idea of the distinction between the two events, imagine that all of the U.S. west of the Mississippi were to be destroyed or extensively damaged by some immense catastrophe in one minute, with absolutely no warning. That is the situation Haiti faces.
As horrific as it was, Katrina was a region-wide catastrophe, not a national one. Damage was enormous in the Gulf region, but the resources of the larger nation remained intact and available for mobilization, even though aid was slow in coming.
Katrina did not flatten our nation's capital or prevent national leaders from communicating with one another. Impacts were catastrophic in areas where Katrina struck, creating significant logistics problems, but the infrastructure of the rest of the nation was untouched. Also important, it was possible to issue warnings for Katrina, which enabled the vast majority of those who were at risk to evacuate to safety. The victims of the earthquake had no such warning.
In contrast, the earthquake in Haiti destroyed much of its capital, Port-au-Prince, and affected approximately one-third of the population of the entire country. The proportion of the nation's population that has been killed, injured or left homeless is enormous. The facilities that could have assisted victims, such as hospitals, clinics and the UN headquarters for the nation, were destroyed or are not operational. Aftershocks, which will continue for weeks, months and perhaps even years, will do additional damage and further compound both rescue and relief efforts.
There is another distinction that makes these events non-comparable.
Katrina affected the most vulnerable in the impact region: the poor, the elderly, the disabled, nursing home and hospital patients, and other at-risk groups. But the concept of vulnerability takes on a new meaning in the Haiti earthquake. The entire nation is desperately poor; 80 percent of the population lives in poverty and more than half that number in abject poverty.
On almost all indicators of well-being -- health, education, literacy, income -- Haiti ranks very low. The nation has a long history of rule by dictators, political coups and savage violence. The capacity of Haiti's series of governments to provide services to its people has been abysmal for most of its history.
In many ways, residents of Haiti faced a daily disaster even before the earthquake. These differences matter, and they should be kept in mind by those seeking to see parallels between the two catastrophes.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Kathleen Tierney.
In Haiti, the ENTIRE country and all of their infrastructure (bad in the first place) is damaged... the other disasters you mentioned were regional.
Through the western media, we didn't get the best view of the damage or aftermath in China or Iran... Maybe there were better accounts out there, but we only got access to see what they wanted us to see, so who knows if the looting or violence was there (and how they handled it if it was).
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Persians and Chinese are orderly (or appear so on tv) in their desperation...
SE Asians don't loot or riot....
So....what is the common thread between what you're seeing in Haiti and NOLA? :roll:
I don't want to put words in your mouth...care to clarify your point?
just skimmed the article above...this is important:
In many ways, residents of Haiti faced a daily disaster even before the earthquake. These differences matter, and they should be kept in mind by those seeking to see parallels between the two catastrophes
....not that I see a point in seeking parallels, unless you seek to politicize this disaster.
Differences in levels of national disaster preparedness could very well be one proximal factor. Governments in Asia likely do have more organized, comprehensive plans in place for these sorts of events ... The Japanese government, for instance, routinely runs its populace through earthquake drills, or at least, it did at one time. I think its fair to say that the poverty and corruption rife in a place like Haiti would preclude good planning, and I think its also fair to say that a massive crisis in NOLA was not really on people's radar, either at the local or the government levels. One can of course ask why there are differences in the need to plan, the need to stay orderly in the face of crisis ... And it may not be real PC to speculate, but there probably ARE cultural differences at work to some extent. Some cultural groups are more present-focused, others more concerned with planning for the future. Some groups are steeped to a greater extent in the need to obey the rule of law, while others are more individualistic in focus. Obviously these are gross generalizations, but they probably have an impact on people's behavior. At the end of the day, culture filters almost everything people do.
Riots and looting in New Orleans (SouthEastern U.S.) and Haiti... not in Iran, China or SouthEast Asia.
New Orleans, Gulf States and Haiti mostly Christian... Iran (Muslim), China (Daoist (officially Aetheist)), SouthEast Asia (Buddhist) are not.
...
Therefore... Katrina and Haiti are alike because Christians riot and loot when desperate... Muslims, Buddhists and Daoist/Aetheists do not.
...
In other words... this is fucking stupid.
Hail, Hail!!!
Indeed ... And this particular example constitutes illogic because there is no a priori reason to believe that religion might play a causal role in rioting behavior, at least in this context. A racial argument would be similarly flawed. Some other national, regional, governmental, socioeconomic, or other characteristic might play a role, however.
I was thinking more along racial lines, but religion works too.
over here, in crisis, the attitude is "i gotta get mine"...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
In that case... you can come to the conclusion that people in the Western Hemisphere riot and loot... and those in the Eastern Hemispere do not.
OR... maybe we should make the American South Eastern Gulf States and Haiti... more like Iran or China. Wouldn't that be a solution?
...
My point is... People (outside of the affected areas) are trying to make up some sort of reasons (that probably don't even exist) to link the two completely different events by employing opinion based fuzzy logic.
Hail, Hail!!!
Well, like the religion example, hemisphere of residence is not likely to be logically related to propensity to riot, based on the fact that riots occur everywhere at least from time to time. I imagine that there's no correlation based on geography alone. And no, making Haiti more like China is an impossible goal from a foreign policy perspective, nevermind that this sort of argument entails some pretty crazy causal pretzel logic.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to be arguing that these natural disasters are entirely separate events and that therefore one should avoid speculating about answers to question like "Why do riots appear to be less frequent in Asia when natural disasters strike, as compared to the so-called new world"? I respecfully disagree. That's the old "everyone is an individual and we should avoid generalizations at all costs" argument, which is great from the standpoint of combating things like racism but very poor from the standpoint of answering social science questions. If all depressed people (for instance) are unique individuals (which they are), that means we should avoid generalizing across depressed people? Looks good on the surface, but science (and treatment!) cannot happen without looking for commonalities. It could very well be the case that trying to answer sociological questions about rioting after natural disasters could bear useful scientific fruit. Truth is, I think that folks are so darn sensitive nowadays that one cannot even ask a question that might require explaining or identifying group differences.
I thought muslims were peaceful for the most part. Guess I was wrong.
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/6629.html
i was talking about EASTERN and ASIAN culture. i did not mention MUSLIMS or MIDDLE EAST...
my post clearly stated my point. i ask you again to please stop putting words in my mouth.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Yes... I AM arguing that these are two, unrelated events and that trying to draw a conclusion is based in opinion... You claim for science to answer the one specific question... Why do people in the new world tend to riot and loot after a natural disaster than people from China and vicinity? My question would be, "Why even ask such a stupid fucking question?" Science would never ask a question like that... but, someone like Rush Limbaugh would.
Because I'm sensitive??? No. Because I know they are two completely different scenarios with too many differing variables to make a 'scientific' comparison. It is as stupid as trying to find as scientific link as to why the great majority of serial killers have been white males. Both are outside the realm of science and only exist in the field of AM Talk Radio and Cable Commentary programs.
Hail, Hail!!!
That's your gig Pal.
http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx ... g+of+Tibet
by the way, i am asking you to stop baiting me.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Fair enough, but WHY do you consider this to be a "stupid fucking question"? You are not speaking like a technical guy who thinks that there are too many variables to tease apart ... Are you that passionate about science, or are you downright offended that someone would ask? You could very well be right, maybe there are too many variables here to do a decent analysis. Personally, I think gimmesometruth's point about cultural beliefs in Asia might have some merit. One can throw out said view and dismiss it as something Rush Limbaugh would say, I suppose, but I fail to see why the question completely lacks merit. Rush Limbaugh probably takes a piss first thing in morning just like the rest of us, yet no one argues that urination is a bigoted process that should be avoided at all costs.
they had a 6.1 aftershock this morning. god help those people....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."