nettime More new orleans
I think Ronda's telling is a pretty fair account of the low-priority assigned to the outstanding flood control issues faced by New Orleans for decades. The other aspect of this whole disaster that needs to be mentioned, especially for an international audience, is the city culture of New Orleans, and to some degree the culture of the entire bayou region. But especially New Orleans. I've never been to New Orleans. That I would want to say anything about the city and what it means to me only serves to illustrate the power and reach of that city's culture and history. New Orleans is America's only afro-caribbean-franco-latin city. I think of the city as a capital of a deep-rooted American counterculture found almost nowhere else, and certainly nowhere else in such city-wide breadth and historical density. The crucible effect of such countercultural concentration and longevity has given America and the world, most obviously, a vital, living, legacy of music almost without equal. New Orleans stands alongside Jamaica and Cuba as small places disproportionately influencing global music listening, playing, and dancing. New Orleans, as a music-producing city, has been influencing the world's ears almost since the inception of recorded music. There are any number of iconic present-day musicians traveling with the million or so homeless. I read that Fats Domino was rescued from off his third floor and his entire family lost everything. So did Irma Thomas. Alex Chilton is at some unknown temporary shelter. Peter Holsapple's home was reportedly flooded in nearly 7 meters of water. These are just some of the famous people who come to mind quickly. The hundreds and probably thousands of unknown New Orleans musicians, who play outside for dancing audiences, who fiddle with mixers in their cramped homes, and who sing to the born, the unborn, and the dead, all as a way of life--what about those people? No doubt we see a few of them setting up their cots in the Astrodome and elsewhere. It is not just that New Orleans was a hip, music-filled city. It is that the culture of the city--that same culture that produces the music for which the city is famous--goes against the grain of mainstream America. In completely simplistic terms, the culture suggests that it is possible to choose participation over spectatorship, creativity over consumerism, collaboration over competition, and multi-ethnic/multi-lingual life over homogeneiety and exclusion. Values-wise, the culture's priorities translate into practices of hospitality and tolerance. I should say, I am not imagining New Orleans as having been some kind of heaven on earth. The fact that many people in New Orleans have never prioritized the almightly dollar contributed to poverty levels, which of course breed their own social problems. And then, as long as there is some true presence of tolerance, there is also some abnormal measure of sleaze. It is true of Amsterdam, it is true of San Francisco, and from what I've read and been told, it has always been true of New Orleans. But both of these negatives only reinforce my basic point about the city's culture running on a different track than that of pious, work-obsessed square america. As New Orleans people who have been made homeless fan out to other cities by the tens of thousands, I wonder where the culture shock will be felt most intensely. Mormon Utah? Lutheran Minnesota? The places where the refugees are housed en masse on disused isolated properties, or where they are being housed with volunteers who have opened their own homes in scattered fashion? I also wonder about the human-scaled relationships that will develop as white religious midwestern folk, for example, take in homeless families from New Orleans. No guarantees, but I think there is the chance that the walls that separate people in this country will be broken in some places. I should say, that is what I hope. They could just as well be strengthened. (The opening up of people's homes to strangers is quite an inspiring thing to see happen. On the other hand, the unregulated, unscreened web-based connectors such as craig's list seem also to be attracting some small time profiteers and sleazebags...yesterday I saw an entry posted seeking a Katrina survivor who needs a home, and is a young asian female who likes to cook, and wants to start a new life helping to run a small lodge with a single white guy in Colorado. What is fascinating is that the opening of private homes makes visible the social fault lines in this country on a rarely seen scale--people offering shelter can specify the types to whom they are open. Gay only, single mothers only, christian only, student only, etc, listed all alongside each other in a spirit of helping and generosity. We help who we want to help...this is the new brand of public service in neocon america.) The fate and effect of this diaspora-within-a diaspora is one thing. (Even the great flood of 1927 displaced only an
Re: nettime A Progressive Response to Katrina
Hi all, Thanks for writing this, Michael. Though I must say that as I read it, my progressive thoughts and my former-resident-of-New-Orleans thoughts are busily thumping one another in my head. As a result I have some significant reservations about these proposals recommendations. To mention a few: Katrina and its aftermath represent what happens when a national leadership buries its head in the sand The federal government maintained the levee system and provides FEMA; the state is the first responder for disaster law and order in the form of the National Guard, as well as statewide emergency planning; the local government is inherently responsible for preparations specific to the community; and individuals have a responsibility to themselves and to their neighbors. At all of these levels there was catastrophic failure. I don't know that it's reasonable to point the finger solely at the level most removed from the catastrophe, even if that level (the Feds) are ultimately the only ones with the resources to handle the largest emergencies. It's reasonable to ask if local officials, as the front line defense against catastrophe, to see if they did everything they could. According to a 7/24/05 article in the New Orleans Times Picayune, local officials knew they didn't have the money/people/resources to cope with a catastrophic storm, so they decided to make a DVD to let people know they were on their own. Great! Make a movie, give it to the poorest of the poor, and you've apparently done all you can. That's not leadership, that's fundamentally an abdication of responsibility. We can't do it is not acceptable at any level of government. It's their core responsibility to find a way. I saw it with another large New Orleans institution that I know very well. After evacuating it became clear that they weren't prepared with an adequate emergency plan for administration, communication, or coordination. Thousands of people affiliated with this institution were left in the dark for a week. Ultimately it's inexcusable at the institutional level when you've had decades of warnings. Large tropical storms and hurricanes hit the Gulf Coast almost every year. It's predictable, and we know in advance when they are coming. Everyone at every level is responsible for being prepared. We're seeing that failure at every level. I dislike the President as much as almost everyone else, but this isn't a good one to pin solely on him or this particular administration. They didn't end the third-world level poverty in the very heart of the South. They did not even end vicious racism. Agreed. I taught in New Orleans public schools for a short while. The segregation is systemic and the racism is real. And the racism goes both ways, incidentally, with a lot of resentment of the white socioeconomic power structure expressed through anger and violence. It's massively dysfunctional on a societal level. Bush's policies merely exacerbated what is still the shame of both parties -- Republican and Democratic alike. Also agreed. Additionally, I would point out that these extraordinarily disadvantaged neighborhoods like the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans didn't spring into existence in January 2001 when Bush was inaugurated. There have been many unbelievably poor neighborhoods for decades, through Republican and Democratic administrations alike. (And overwhelmingly Democratic local government, I should add.) Not much has worked to help those people, whether we refer to a generation of Great Society programs or a generation of Reaganesque tough love. Everyone shares the blame. Let's bear that in mind when crucifying Bush. Finally, one reason for our current problems is the utter failure of the US system of education, which has failed to reach, interest or challenge most of our citizens. We have to find ways to make education available to all, captivating, and rigorous enough so that our citizens are capable of understanding the kinds of challenges we face, capable of global thinking and understanding, not afraid to tackle hard problems, not afraid to seem smart, less susceptible to lies and spin. I strongly agree here too. Education is the tipping point. But then again, almost everyone acknowledges the criticality of education and agrees that we could do more. It's a broader problem than just curriculums or funding. It's also a socioeconomic problem; at least in the short term, one of the strongest correlations with K-12 academic performance is not per-pupil funding but socioeconomic background and community values. You can spend lavishly on education in disadvantaged communities but the biggest factor is whether or not the students have the baseline resources allowing them to learn. This includes cultural values, an emphasis on education at home, proper sleep, medical care, and nutrition, a stable home life, and many other critical factors that can't simply be purchased with government funds.
