Hurricane Katrina and Consumer "Culture"

Laeth MacLaurie

New Metal Member
Aug 21, 2005
184
0
0
Hurricane Katrina has signed her name across the face of the Gulf Coast. Thousands are homeless, hundreds are missing and presumed dead, the very trappings of modern existence have been swept away and strewn across the landscape by the wrathful hand of Nature. Fittingly, it is New Orleans, a perfect microcosm of the consumer "culture" gone mad which spawned the disaster in the first place, that the attention of the US and the world is now riveted to.

New Orleans, The Big Easy, City of jazz, miscegenation and the beads-for-boobs barter system. Now, in a delightfully ironic twist of fate, it lies drowning in it's own filth and wracked by chaos as its negro community takes advantage of the storm's aftermath to steal television sets and other talismans of the cult of money.

The horror! People living without electricity, at the mercy of Nature! Of course, the government is rushing to rectify the situation. And, as usual, private charities are cashing in on the parade of sympathy squeezed out of a well trained and socialized populace, ever ready to fork over their cash to a "worth cause" without every stopping to think whether the cause really is worthy.

Inevitably, in the rush to "Save New Orleans," things that should be painfully obvious are overlooked. Namely, that New Orleans and all the places like it, traffic choked cesspools dumping hydrocarbons into the atmosphere, are the reason that hurricanes like Katrina are increasing rapidly both in numbers and in ferocity. The West, as typified by New Orleans, long ago traded in an inheritance of greatness for the easy comfort of the automobile, the microwave and the television set (and through Western military might, this insane lifestyle has been forced upon the entire world).

This trade off has not been without catastrophic costs. Biodiversity is sacrificed at every turn to fill empty souls with plastic dreams. Human cultural diversity has likewise declined in the face of the spread of the consumerist money culture. Everywhere we are fouling our own nest, turning our water to sewage and the air we breathe into a carcinogenic misama.

And, the hydrocarbons from our automobiles and the power plants that light our homes and keep the boob tube running are turning the planet into a sauna. Global warming means just that, global warming. And this includes warming the waters at the surface of the ocean, which, as any idiot who has taken an intro atmospheric sciences course should be able to tell you, means more hurricanes.

But, of course, in our rush to pat ourselves on the back for our admirable pity and empathy, this truth will be lost. Money will pour in and New Orleans will be rebuilt. The city's cars and refineries will once again spew toxic sludge into the air, and the next hurricane will just be that much bigger (and come that much sooner). And we'll only have ourselves to blame.
 
I think it's just shit that stuff like this happens all the time in the Caribbean and in Indonesia etc (Typhoons) and it gets barely any coverage.
As soon as it's big old US drowning under water every media channel has blanket coverage.
Did you know the Red Cross aid effort to help the city is it's biggest ever....sorry should the little wave that destroyed towns and villages in 10+ countries in the Indian Ocean not have been the biggest ever!

I agree it's bitter irony to some extent. Though i doubt it will change anyones way of life there or in the rest of the west. The city will be rebuilt, new dams etc, pump all the water out and get the city back as it was.
People might start to listen to the warnings now though, esp if this happens again in a few months time.
 
A huge amount of nations (with American in the forefront) donated money for the tsunami. As far as I know, Venezuela is the only nation who offered help for Katrina.
 
Iridium said:
A huge amount of nations (with American in the forefront) donated money for the tsunami. As far as I know, Venezuela is the only nation who offered help for Katrina.

Why would US need any monetary help?
It was just reported that the Iraq war is the most expensive war fought by US in 60 years, costing 5 billion $ a month. And immediately some expert from AEI was declaring that considering current US economy the war costs are just "a drop in a bucket". So covering damage from Katrina should be a piece of cake, shouldn't it? :rolleyes:
 
surely a great deal of things that were destroyed are unnecessary to humanity, as i myself would agree and have thought of when i heard the news. i am no fan of the goings-on in New Orleans, or the oil industry that was also shutdown by Katrina. however, i will acknowedge that despite these trivialities, people are there suffering from lack of clean water and food and shelter, basic need to all humanity from metropolis to jungle villiage. in that respect, i do believe they deserve support by those who can provide it, as they did not bring this disaster upon themselves. humanity does not control hurricanes. i would not offer assistance to rebuild the "cesspool" as you have called it, but i would offer assistance to the people who lived in it, that they might start anew once the waters have washed clean the place.
 
Silent Song said:
surely a great deal of things that were destroyed are unnecessary to humanity, as i myself would agree and have thought of when i heard the news. i am no fan of the goings-on in New Orleans, or the oil industry that was also shutdown by Katrina. however, i will acknowedge that despite these trivialities, people are there suffering from lack of clean water and food and shelter, basic need to all humanity from metropolis to jungle villiage. in that respect, i do believe they deserve support by those who can provide it, as they did not bring this disaster upon themselves. humanity does not control hurricanes. i would not offer assistance to rebuild the "cesspool" as you have called it, but i would offer assistance to the people who lived in it, that they might start anew once the waters have washed clean the place.

I would agree that we should be doing everything necessary to help the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. But rebuilding a city built in a hole between a lake and the ocean doesn't help anyone. It's just throwing good money after bad.
 
Can anyone tell me why the city is/was there?
I've not idea and never been told.
Why build a city several meters under sea level with the open sea on one side, a lake on the other and the country's biggest river flowing right through the middle (again higher than the city is)? Seems like a recipe for disaster to me!
 
Yeah but why built it below sea level, and also below the level of the river?
Asking for trouble IMO.
Likewise, redirecting the river with levees to make it go where you want was asking for trouble too. This river can move hundreds of tonns of sediment each year so who though a wall was going to keep it back.
 
Lord SteveO said:
Can anyone tell me why the city is/was there?
I've not idea and never been told.
Why build a city several meters under sea level with the open sea on one side, a lake on the other and the country's biggest river flowing right through the middle (again higher than the city is)? Seems like a recipe for disaster to me!

It's got a nice natural harbor.

Of course, this is an utter waste since most cargo ships don't come close to shore anymore anyway, and instead shuttle in their goods from offshore anchorages, so you don't need massive docking facilities like NOLA has.

The city should be abandoned.
 
Laeth MacLaurie said:
I would agree that we should be doing everything necessary to help the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. But rebuilding a city built in a hole between a lake and the ocean doesn't help anyone. It's just throwing good money after bad.
again, i agree.
 
at the same time, would you (slient song) donate the same amount of time and energy to animals caught in the aftermath of an oil spill? seems like you value certain things over others in your little cosmic scheme, such as humans being a more worthwhile creature to save, despite the fact that humans were the ones who thought it a good idea to build a city in that location in the first place.

Why the emphasis on humanism?
 
N.O. will not be rebuilt, regardless of wishful thinking. The soil and ground water are totally contaminated by both industrial waste and organic decomposition, and all that that implies...

That entire area is wiped out in terms of infrastructure, will suffer more hurricanes in the future, and is now a toxic waste dump. There is simply no way to rebuild, and even if they did, who would move there?
 
Sounds like it's getting worse all the time. Apparently 1000s will die within the week as the federal gov is doing bugger all to get people out.
Also the city is still under water and the looting etc means no repairs to the levees! I also heard the pumps to get water out in this situation are fecked too so the water is not going anywhere.
Add to that the fact that most of the city is already destroyed by water and wind the unrest will make it worse. And there are also lots of fires now (one big one in a chemical plant i think) which can't be put out as it's a)too dangerous due to looters b)no roads etc are free and clear to get there.
Looks like it's only going to get a lot worse.

Anyone hear the mayor of NO swearing and getting seriously pissed at Mr Bush in a Tv interview? That was fecking hilarious!
 
That mayor is right. There is a way to get these people food and shelter. But I guess it's not worth the $ for Bush. This is actually great for the mayor. With these rants he's going on about is definitely going to help him become reinstated for a second term.
 
Blaphbee said:
at the same time, would you (slient song) donate the same amount of time and energy to animals caught in the aftermath of an oil spill? seems like you value certain things over others in your little cosmic scheme, such as humans being a more worthwhile creature to save, despite the fact that humans were the ones who thought it a good idea to build a city in that location in the first place.

Why the emphasis on humanism?
actually i would, because the accident would be our fault. we would be responsible for fixing what we have done.
 
I'm fairly cetain that a result of all this will be that Bush will loose the support of a lot of voters in the south, especially the poor in the areas hit by such disasters.
Who would vote for a guy who seems to be little concerned with the plight of those there. The response has been a joke, there's fire all over the place and they can't do a dammed thing.