Skip to main content

Was it deliberate malevolence or just criminal incompetence?

i began this blog a while ago, hoping to find something constructive to do with the anger, frustration and sense of helplessness i felt during and after katrina. i had some ideas and thoughts that i wanted to write out in long form, but due to events in my life i laid it all down for a while. i've been wanting to begin again but with the torrent of criminal behavior from this administration and its allies it's been difficult to decide where exactly to begin. then i saw a clip of historian doug brinkley on msnbc's scarborough country talking about bush's failure in leadership in leaving the gulf coast essentially a wasteland. people are expressing surprise at this apparent failure instead of realizing that failure is the man's middle name (the w is silent).

the title of this entry comes from a chris floyd post about the federal declaration of emergency in louisiana prior to the hurricane and how it failed to cover the coastal counties (illustrated here). the basic question has been bouncing around the left for a while: is he evil or just stupid? a blogger today said it's time to stop asking that. i can't remember who wrote that but i completely agree, because the obvious answer is yes. the underlying thread for every bad decision, every inaction, the far-reaching corruption is ideology. i can't really explain this thing called the neo-con ideology, i don't fully understand it. it makes no practical sense to me. it is essentially to put in place a set of governing beliefs that assert america's will through the commander in chief's imperialistic strength, you know, the military, if threats are not enough. it is predicated on doing whatever is necessary to protect america's security. because of their financial and social standings for most of the neo-cons protecting america's security means protecting the security of its corporations, thus the boom in corporate wealth and stagnation in wages. there are those who i know who would give me shit for this oversimplification, if they were to actually read this far, but the actions of the administration support it. the reason i began writing about the katrina aftermath is because it is a very stark and difficult to spin snapshot of who this administration is.

there is an obvious question that i have not seen asked. while the president was able to find it in his heart to end his vacation early to come back to dc to sign legislation to "save the life" of a single brain-dead woman, how could he possibly be so completely unaware of the thousands needing their lives saved during his next vacation? how is it possible that it took that long to end his vacation, and still so much longer for aid to reach all of the people in need? it is impossible to be that incompetent. i don't know why people are so afraid to call it deliberate. put simply, a competent govt. response would have been anathema to the neo-con philosophy of a smaller government; a government, to paraphrase grover norquist, small enough to drown in a bathtub or a backyard in the ninth ward. this presidency is built on the idea of the people helping the people, because government is too ineffective to depend on, unless it's for corporate welfare.

so that's it: the gulf coast lies in ruin because of ideology. ask yourself why they would depend on cruise ships, motel vouchers, and tent cities when they could have used the much more effective section 8 program to house people quicker and at lower costs; or why instead of worrying about the collapsing levees on august 29th, as pointed out in the chris floyd post, bush was worried about illegal aliens. this of course comes from the white house transcript of his arizona speech that day. there is no faith-based group that can repair new orleans and there is no market based solution. throwing money at halliburton certainly won't work. the only thing that will work is effective federal leadership from an administration that doesn't believe in anything except the federal power, or rather the presidential power to make war. that being the case why is anyone actually surprised that the gulf coast still lies in ruin?

lastly, i read someone earlier this week, can't remember who, explaining why kanye was wrong about bush not liking black people. i'd have to say i agree, but not because of his convoluted logic (which amounted to saying just because bush doesn't care about the black vote doesn't mean he doesn't like black people). i don't think kanye went far enough, bush doesn't like the vast majority of americans, doesn't care about our rights, our needs, or our constitution.

Conspiracy theory bonus question:

In light of what we now know about the FBI's illegal spying , the president's illegal NSA wiretapping, and general assertions of executive power, and the controversy surrounding voting machine manufacturer diebold, whose recently resigned ceo had promised to deliver ohio to bush in the last election; do you believe these people ever intend to lose the presidency again?


Popular posts from this blog

'Anti-racism', All Trap, No Honey: A Discourse About Discourse

One of the things that prevents me from writing more often is the sense that I'm just writing the same thing repeatedly from a slightly different angle. In a nutshell, all I'm saying is that moral idealism substituted for material goals will not lead to justice, but is an argument against materialism. I'm a dumb person's low rent Adolph Reed Jr. translator. I'm a "class reductionist" who understands that when the discourse is reduced to just class there's nothing as important as food, water and shelter that's left out. I often find myself contending with people who insist that there is, unable to name anything. They don't understand that they're making an argument against economic redistribution, or they don't care. There are no concrete manifestations of systemic racism or any oppression that are not dealt with through economic redistribution. When people say that economic redistribution won't end racism, what they mean is that

The Cuckoo Movement

A reed warbler raising a common cuckoo chick it hatched from an egg surreptitiously placed in its nest by the cuckoo's parent “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”―  George Orwell Parasite to Virus Brood parasites are species that manipulate other organisms to raise their young for them. Among the best known of brood parasites is the cuckoo.  A number of cuckoo species have specialized to lay their eggs among hosts whose eggs theirs mimic closely enough to provide protective camouflage. The eggs hatch sooner than host eggs, the chicks grow faster, and they often eject the eggs or hatchlings of the host from the nest. The cuckoo chicks begin to mimic the cries of the host young to encourage the fostering birds to keep up with their growth to the detriment of their own young. Following one of the first documented cases of computer espionage in the mid 80s, the concept of brood parasitism was applied to malware.

Erasing Women To Be Inclusive

I began a Dictionary for the Modern Age. It was an attempt to record the absurdity of social justice discourse and its remove from material reality. It started as an amusement but I grew quickly unable to inure myself to how dumb, to be frank, the discourse is. If the point of language is to trade in reality and meaning, the point of social justice discourse is the exact opposite. It exists to obscure reality and remove meaning to substitute the desires of elites for the needs of vulnerable people. It has no defined concepts or fixed definitions. This is especially apparent with what is called trans rights activism.  It's entirely discursive, but you're not allowed to ask questions about it. It starts by premising that there is some right lost to people upon declaring themselves the opposite sex that must be reattained. False premises are always the basis of this ideology spread through logic defying assertions of faith like, transwomen are women. There is no right lost, the go