![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Boston + a Theory
Sep. 6th, 2005 08:26 pmWent to Boston for 10 days. Saw approximately 7 hojillion old friends who I hadn't seen in years and had a total blast. Took care of 4 dogs, 2 cats, and 1 fish.
But this post is more dedicated to a theory I have been brewing on. The administration's failure with Hurricane Katrina aftermath is so awful that it seems that malice is the only theory, because nobody could truly be that incompetent. But I really don't think that's the case. What happened in New Orleans is what happens when you put security guys in charge of disaster relief and recovery. FEMA has been folded into DHS, and DHS cares about security, not lifesaving. So the first thing they did was deploy national guard troops to the city's PERIMETER. They then set up checkpoints on the only road out of town, and turned down all unauthorized attempts to leave, as documented here. This makes perfect sense if you view the problem as 'stopping the spread of anarchy' instead of 'rescuing survivors'. The first thing you do is secure the perimeter, then you can think about dealing with the people inside it.
Rescuers aren't security guards - they need to trust people and throw money around and err on the side of sloppy-but-lifesaving. Security guards aren't rescuers - their job is to distrust people and to err on the side of following the absolute letter of the law and erring on the side of preventing instead of allowing. Putting FEMA under DHS authority was a major screwup, possibly THE major screwup.
Similarly, this is why the US military is having trouble in Iraq: securing the peace requires a nuanced approach and political savvy, which is markedly different from the military's main purpose - killing people and breaking things. You can't silently and secretly repurpose a bureaucracy. Hell, it's not even clear that you can loudly and explicity repurpose a bureacracy. It's too bad that failure to realize this is killing people both at home and abroad.
But this post is more dedicated to a theory I have been brewing on. The administration's failure with Hurricane Katrina aftermath is so awful that it seems that malice is the only theory, because nobody could truly be that incompetent. But I really don't think that's the case. What happened in New Orleans is what happens when you put security guys in charge of disaster relief and recovery. FEMA has been folded into DHS, and DHS cares about security, not lifesaving. So the first thing they did was deploy national guard troops to the city's PERIMETER. They then set up checkpoints on the only road out of town, and turned down all unauthorized attempts to leave, as documented here. This makes perfect sense if you view the problem as 'stopping the spread of anarchy' instead of 'rescuing survivors'. The first thing you do is secure the perimeter, then you can think about dealing with the people inside it.
Rescuers aren't security guards - they need to trust people and throw money around and err on the side of sloppy-but-lifesaving. Security guards aren't rescuers - their job is to distrust people and to err on the side of following the absolute letter of the law and erring on the side of preventing instead of allowing. Putting FEMA under DHS authority was a major screwup, possibly THE major screwup.
Similarly, this is why the US military is having trouble in Iraq: securing the peace requires a nuanced approach and political savvy, which is markedly different from the military's main purpose - killing people and breaking things. You can't silently and secretly repurpose a bureaucracy. Hell, it's not even clear that you can loudly and explicity repurpose a bureacracy. It's too bad that failure to realize this is killing people both at home and abroad.
