| nettime's progressive weathermen on Sat, 10 Sep 2005 12:18:22 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina [4x] |
Table of Contents:
Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
"tobias c. van Veen" <[email protected]>
Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
John Hopkins <[email protected]>
Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
[email protected]
Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
"E. Miller" <[email protected]>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:47:34 -0400
From: "tobias c. van Veen" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
> Give
> us the vision of JFK, not the muddle of Foucault. We need it now.
1. Send a man to the moon.
2. Attack the Bay of Pigs.
tV
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:05:38 -0700
From: John Hopkins <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
Hallo Michael et al...
Just a brief reflection on two of your points:
>* The levees must be restored much stronger, adequate for a much more intense
>hurricane;
...snip...
>* The Mississippi must be ecologically restored in a more sustainable manner;
I would suggest that these two demands are mutually exclusive, if one
proceeds in a similar way as is the case in most (all?) previous
Corps of Engineer manipulation of the natural landscape.
The entire Mississippi River basin stretching north 2000 Km to
Minneapolis has already been completely modified with levee systems
that, instead of mitigating the flooding in times of
higher-than-average precipitation has often made the ensuing damage
greater. Of course, the narrow view where levee and water management
systems protect the short-term interests of developers and other
powerful interest groups is the most common view.
The fact remains, VERY often, when humans engineer the landscape,
there are long-term consequences.
A simple example would be the damming of the Colorado River above
the Grand Canyon. 30 years after the completion of the massive
upstream Glen Canyon Dam, people began to notice that the river in
the Grand Canyon had lost most of the sand bars which formed an
integral part of the entire ecosystem (because the dam stopped all
sedimentation and allowed only water to flow). In the last decade
there have been managed attempts to restore those sand bars via
controlled flooding but these are not really working (as a simulation
of the natural system). Another effect of damming is the creation of
a 130-meter-deep lake, the water that is allowed to pass through is
about 5-10 degrees C COLDER than the normal water temperature. This
has either killed off native species of fish or at least put them
into extreme endangerment. Basically, the entire ecosystem of the
Canyon has been disrupted.
An interesting side note -- The Colorado River carries a tremendous
sediment load (thus the name of the river) -- it is estimated that
the Glen Canyon Dam and other dams on the river will actually become
redundant as they will completely fill with that sediment within a
few decades. In addition, the planting of non-native tamarisk (a
Eurasian plant) for the "benign" purpose of erosion control has lead
to its spread up every single riparian river environment in the West.
It displaces all native plants! http://www.tamariskcoalition.org/
Again, when humans intervene in the environment, there is always a
powerful and compelling short-term argument that claims enormous
benefits. Long term effects are seldom considered or even imagined.
The short-term benefits of damming the Colorado were/are to provide
electricity to cities in the west -- but the question is, is it
better to make hydro power and destroy the river or to build tens of
massive coal-fired generating stations (that have reduced the air
clarity in the west from 120 miles to under 50 miles in 30 years
time). Or maybe we have to stop wasting energy as a culture (oh
please don't bring that option up!!)
There is an excellent and well-researched book "Cadillac Desert: The
American West and Its Disappearing Water" by Marc Reisner which
traces the development of water resources (rivers, aquifers, even
rain clouds!) in the West of the US. There are plenty of examples of
COMPLETE environmental disasters which have already happened or are
continuing to develop right now. Although it does not cover the
Mississippi Basin, it does illustrate the mindset of the Corps of
Engineers and the US govt.
One might conclude that this argument makes the permanent existence
of New Orleans a lost cause. And maybe that is the simple truth,
that people are in a place that they shouldn't be -- or, dependent on
a federal infrastructure, that they have to accept the consequences
when it fails. Build larger levees, and when they break in the
soon-to-be-unleashed Cat 6! storm, and the destruction will be just
that much more intense. "The bigger they come, the harder they
fall," to borrow from Jimmy Cliff. The harder that humans resist or
distort natural energy systems, the greater the intensity of the
failure of that resistance. I think that the natural system is such
that it will always overcome any human resistance in the long run...
Problem is that the folks making the decisions on these manipulations
of natural systems often never feel the consequences when they fail;
it is usually the poor and marginal people who get shafted.
And, if you think New Orleans was a disaster -- just wait until the
next major earthquake in either northern or southern California. All
water is piped in, and all water pipes cross major fault zones. 13
million people start gunning very quickly with they are thirsty!
Cheers,
John Hopkins
- --
- -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
tech-no-mad::hypnostatic:: with a shattered spine on a slow mend
domain: http://neoscenes.net
travelog: http://neoscenes.net/travelog/weblog.php
- -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 18:34:30 +0100
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
Hiya,
> Give
> us the vision of JFK, not the muddle of Foucault.
JFK?! He was the geezer who almost blew up the planet rather than let Cuba
become independent of America - and he also prepared the way for the US
invasion of Vietnam. Foucault was undoubtedly a lousy philospher, but, as far
as I know, he didn't kill large numbers of lefties like JFK did...
Later,
Richard
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:30:25 -0700
From: "E. Miller" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> A Progressive Response to Katrina
Sure, JFK wasn't a progressive by modern standards; it was almost 50 years
ago, after all, and they were fighting the cold war. My point was that he
helped move American society from the pervasive conservatism of the
Eisenhower 50s to the massive cultural shifts of the 60s, and he did it in
part by inspiring people with progressive ideals. "Ask not what your
country can do for you..." and so on.
By contrast, our "Bush is yucky, the world is awful, tax cuts are bad, now
eat your spinach" approach isn't exactly going over well with the
electorate.
Eric
On 9/9/05 10:34 AM, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hiya,
<....>
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]