Will the American social and economic system - which creates the wealth that pays for billionaires' private jets, and the poverty which does not allow for a bus fare out of New Orleans - be addressed?The headline for this unbelievably smug piece is "Katrina prompts charity not change."
It has been tinkered with before of course, sometimes as a result of natural disasters. There were for instance plenty of buses on hand for this week's Rita evacuation.
But the system's fundamentals - no limit on how far you can fly and little limit on how low you can fall - remain as intact as they were in the San Francisco gold rush.
UPDATE: This post got a strange link from Andrew Sullivan:
ALTHOUSE ON THE BEEB: Picked up by Instapundit and the Corner as more evidence of wretched BBC anti-American bias, I read the piece assailed by Ann Althouse. It's an opinion piece, not news reporting, so obviously a little more lee-way for bias should be allowed. And yes, there's a bizarre assumption that there is no welfare net in America - or that we haven't just expanded it to cover millions of wealthy seniors, or that welfare rolls haven't been reduced by almost a half in a few years, and so on.Was my post about the BBC being biased? Did I somehow not perceive that the writer I called a "BBC opinionwriter" was "writing an an opinion piece, not news reporting"? You'd think my use of the term "opinionwriter" would have nailed that down rather hard! But thanks for the ridiculously inappropriate patronizing, Andrew! Check out the title of my post! It's awfully damned obvious that I'm writing about the stupidity of this one writer's notion that the United States may be headed for a revolution, which Sullivan completely agrees with in his post, even though for some reason he writes as if he's taking issue with me. It's quite apparent that Sullivan is mainly concerned with things that Glenn Reynolds and Jonah Goldberg said at their sites when they linked to me, but he didn't bother to write accurately about me. I think if Sullivan is going to use my name in his post title, he ought to take care about acting as if he's got a problem with me, when, in fact, he doesn't. But Sullivan doesn't read my blog, I'm almost sure. He just reads Instapundit and the Corner. To him, I'm just an empty link found there.
पोस्ट्स
२७ टिप्पण्या:
Some people just don't want to give up on the theory of capitalism as the root of all evil. It's a sophisticated point of view (if you're still in college).
I think it's safe to say that in a country where the main problem of the poor is obesity, there will never be the sort of revolution that the pampered pinks of the BBC hope for.
Now, a revolution against the TV licence fee system in Britain-- that could get ugly!
I spend a lot of time in the developing world -- the part of the planet earnest types at the BBC claim to care so much about.
When America's 'poor' are among the richest people on the planet, living in the most opportunity-rich society in human history, the BBC's cheap moralizing is pretty hard to take seriously.
As to the statement, "no limit on how far you can fly and little limit on how low you can fall" --
Can't really have one without the other. People who think risk and hardship can be wrung out of life with the right government policies will never understand this.
The freedom to design new heart valves or build the next Microsoft can also be wasted; creative energy squandered on decadence.
Freedom and complete responsibility for one's destiny are both exhiliarating and terrifying -- and a lot of hard work.
Much easier to either claim choices don't exist, or to demand that someone else make those choices for you.
Ann
"...unbelievably smug? Perhaps. But besides his style, do you have any disagreement with the substance of Webb’s insightful and provocative article?
Having lived in both Europe and the U.S. (obviously) having a Brit talk about poverty etc is just laughable.
All the BBC does here is show the bias and ignorance if its author.
BTW, for those that don't get a chance to hear it, the BBC in general, and BBC World Service to be exact, make CBS look like Fox News.
First, the BBC can go pound salt. They have gotten so whimpy that they will fold under one man's anger over a dessert lid!
Secondly, here is a POV that will undoubtedly be considered from an ivory tower, but the best thing we could do for the poor is to kick them in the butt and force them to start working for their own future instead of living off the dole. Now, I realize there are some that really need welfare help, but that's just it, it's only supposed to be help not a lifestyle.
I'm aggravated by the young man who demanded that he be given $20k to get back on his feet (otherwise he's stuck in this 'modern form of slavery')! I am also getting news from a friend who works in public housing that the people they are trying to get into homes from the Katrina evacuation are nasty, demanding, and for the most part spitting in the faces of the people working so hard to help them. Everyone has to work for what they have and for the vast majority of us it is hard work that got us where we are, not having it handed to us.
Thank you for "listening," just had to get that out there.
Oh, yeah, the BBC has been really driving me mad! Matt Wells has done some really horrible hit pieces. I had to savage him on my buddy's blog
http://garmhowling.blogspot.com/2005/09/flood-recedes-thugs-take-over.html
I am not quite sure of his point. We will see tweaks. But a revolution? Maybe in LA and NO politics. But I don't see it anywhere else. After all, it wasn't the government that gave us Katrina.
I found it interesting that he saw us as a nation pulling together, and suggested that that was indicia that we would pull apart in a revolution.
One big problem with the idea of a revolution that wouled presumably give us a more activist government is that it was governmental failures that led to a lot of the problems we saw. Overall, the private sector reacted much more quickly.
Indeed, WallMart had supplies moving into the area well ahead of the huricane. Apparently, they were watching the storm's approach much more closely than was the Governor of LA. (This is typical for the company - Thomas Friedman talked about it in his book "The World is Flat", that the company has meteorologists on staff so that they can have, for example, extra generators and water on the floor when huricanes hit. This isn't done through altruism, but rather to maximize sales. And yet - the best supply system in the world was able to easily out perform the government. (And also note that they helped lead in altruism too here).
So, does he really think that we are going to issue in an era of even bigger government after this?
The entire BBC is an organization on government dole -- and they've developed an unshakable conviction of their permanent entitlement to it -- no matter how incompetent and intellectually flabby they become.
Ending the license fee is their only hope for future relevance -- a slim hope.
I lived in England for six frightening years. They can't make a commode that will flush the first time. They need to work on basics before criticizing anything American. The real truth about England is middle class English have a tougher life than below poverty line Americans. It's unfortunate that the Brit public has to be taxed to pay for this BBC garbage.
Excerpt from Webb's piece:
Speeding along a relatively unscathed motorway between the wonderfully exotic-sounding towns of Pascagoula and Biloxi, I switched on the car radio and heard the tobacco-stained drawl of a southern politician comparing the destruction in his district to that of Hiroshima.
Tasteless I thought. A typical example of American inability to see that suffering in other nations at other times dwarfs anything the average American ever sees.
Tobacco-stained drawl? Tasteless? A typical example?
But I wonder, do Americans reading this catch the real insult sentence in this piece.
Exotic-sounding names
Lovelyyyyy.
Reminds me of my late-grandfather who, when I invited a little American playpal over for the weekend in our Oxfordshire home, greeted most cordially, and proceeded to her needle it into her all night at the dinner table:
Thanksgiving? Such a wonderfully quaint holiday.
Ah yes, 1776. Did you know the foundation of our house was built in the 1460's?
Of course, pancakes for breakfast sounds very exotic. We must try that one day, don't you think?
And you know, my granddad was a champion much before his time, of all things African (and Brazilian). He was amazingly kind, gracious and caring, usually.
But for some reason, the US got his hackles up, and allowed him to be as nasty as this Webb person is.
And as the BBC typically are to the US (and Israel).
Ugh, I feel like I need a shower after reading that article.
Cheers,
Victoria
The entire BBC is an organization on government dole --
Which is actually ironic, since of course so many of the BBC apparatchiks are of the upper-middle classes, even scions of the county set by birth, and education.
I once went to the BBC buildings in Bloomsbury to visit a friend who worked there (she's since moved on), and I hadn't heard so many plummy voices since I was at boarding school.
You know, self-hate is a very corrosive thing in life.
In many ways, I feel sorry for those people at the BBC who feel the only way to atone for their privileges in early life, is to say and do as you saw above.
Then that makes them A-OK, and perhaps when the revolution comes, they'll be spared.
Right.
Cheers,
Victoria
Which is why this dreck has little effect on any opinion in this country but that of the so-called "cultural elite". There it is oh, so fashionable to express such views.
Y'all should have read to the end of the piece. Webb doesn't just ask the question, "whether there will be a revolution." He answers it, thus:
'No, there will not -- because American charity, goodwill, and initiative are enough to counterbalance the failures of her government.'
Read the passage about the man 'with a chainsaw and two handguns.' This isn't a hit piece. It's as close as a British socialist can come to an ode to America. He can't say, "How I love her!" like John Wayne did. But he does say, effectively, 'In spite of everything -- wow.'
Victoria: The phrase "tobacco-stained drawl" was what originally made me want to do a post about this article, but then I saw that he acknowledged that his prejudice took him in the wrong direct, so I didn't slam him for that.
Grim: LOL.
The idea constantly floated from socialist-leaning states and individuals is that socialism will trump human greed and inefficiency. It's never in so many words, of course, but that's the gist. Of course, it doesn't. It never has. Every attempt to do this has failed. What capitalism does is create so MUCH wealth that it, uh, overflows the levees of greed, sloth and self-interest. More people have a chance at a decent life.
One byproduct of this is that some folks not only become wealthy, but obsecenely so. Yet this does not mean capitalism produces more poor, as is often implied, than other systems. It does produce (as the New York Times loves to remind us) a greater 'gap' between the wealthy and the poor.
These hurricanes are being used as opportunity for socialist-leaning Europeans and others to assault capitalism. One can hardly blame them, since the normal state of affairs has the US bailing out socialism's myriad failures. If we were to bow to their marching orders, exactly who would the world look to, to lead them out of the next recession?
Don't forget your principles in the face of current events, as George Bush now seems to be doing. Remember that in an earlier time, these hurricanes would have crippled our economy for years, not merely slowed it. Remember who leads the world out of dark times, and remember why.
Their can never be a revolution when the "oppressed" are passively waiting on a monthly check from the government. They might whine, seeth and manufacture conspiracy theories, but they will never do anything that could disturb that check coming on the 30th.
Socialism breeds passivity... just look at Western Europe.
So, what's Eurotopia's excuse for letting tens of thousands die in a comparatively mild heat wave? A heat wave during which most of our socialist betters couldn't be bothered to break away from their mandatory six week vacation long enough to check on grandma?
Stavros: I lived in England for six frightening years. They can't make a commode that will flush the first time.
P.J. O'Rourke described Britain as a country with an eighteenth century class system and seventeenth century plumbing.
Smug? Seemed more wistful to me my fine rethuglican apologizer.
ah, the BEEB...
the bad news is that CNNInternational is almost as bad...and many people think CNNI is American...it is not...it's run by Brits from Hong Kong...
Ann,
I assume he was writing for the UK folks from the frontier. Having said that, my major issues with the article ae focused on the missing links in this section that misrepresent th facts and those responsible:
---------------------------------
"Will the American social and economic system - which creates the wealth that pays for billionaires' private jets, and the poverty which does not allow for a bus fare out of New Orleans - be addressed? "
(INSERT: Bus fare didn't matter. There was a Plan for evacuation that called for the use of local school and transit. Free buses were available, but the local leadership didn't use them per the plan. A free EMPTY passenger train left NOLA the night before the storm. The local government turned down the offer of free seats and did not inform the citizens. By the time that buses were considered, they had been flooded out. Houston didn't make those mistakes. END INSERT)
"It has been tinkered with before of course, sometimes as a result of natural disasters. There were for instance plenty of buses on hand for this week's Rita evacuation. "
-------------------
How is poverty relevant to this set of enhanced facts?
Attacking the Beeb for Anti-American bias is grabbing at low hanging fruit and hardly worth the effort.
Defending the Anglo-American alliance against these clueless hate mongerers is important though, and it would seem that the current leadership in both countries are too smart to let the chattering get in the way of the cooperation.
(and the poor attendance at the anti-war rallies both in London and DC suggests that the respective public opinions of our nations aren't being well represented by the AP/WaPo/NYT/CNN/PBS/et al or the BBC)
The american system does not "create" poverty. Communism does not "create" poverty. Poverty is what you start with, and you work your way up from there. a system may be better or worse at letting you get out of it, but no economic system "creates" poverty.
Is this sort of bile new, or is it just being revealed by the internet?
It's not new -- but as in all Anglo-American relations, it's complex.
I have to admit, though, I haven't liked many of the commentaries in this thread regarding "the British" when our ire should be towards the BBC.
I don't think I need to remind anyone that Britain provided the cultural and legal framework which allowed this country to flourish, and take off on its own; more successfully, earlier, and with a greater sense of self, than any other country in the Americas.
That's not down to us entirely, but without Britain, Americans would be Mexicans today, with no fences to climb over, or rivers to escape to.
We're also the country, in good, bad, or indifferent times, that is always shoulder-to-shoulder with Americans, including having our lads dying for each other's countries and causes.
So these sniping commentaries about plumbing, and the like, are nearly as infantile as the odious "tobacco-stained" remark made by Webb.
I kept thinking, good Lord, I'm surprised they haven't mentioned our lack of dental hygiene.
No, that's obviously not the way to go in this or any argument regarding Anglo-American relations.
Now that I've gotten that off my chest, let me just say this:
Don't think the BBC are representative of British attitudes towards Americans.
By and large, the only sections of society that are condenscending towards Americans are the upper-classes, and even then, they don't reject Americans: they just feel threatened by them.
And the working-classes to have their problems, vis-a-vis Americans, largely because of jealousy and frustration.
It's the heart of Britain, the middle-classes, as ever the silent majority, who have a sneaking liking for the Americans.
They admire their can-do attitude, their fighting spirit, and their frankness.
As I alluded to, they may not always come out and say that, but believe me when I say that admiration exists.
And if there is anything that defines the British most, is that when someone is being unfair or unjust towards someone, we take a twisted delight in going against that opinion.
The more the elite media, led by the BBC but working hand-in-glove with the Guardian, et. al., dumps on the US and Americans, the more the British will be put off by their unfairness.
That's already the case now.
It's very sad to see the severe degradation of the Atlantic relationships in recent years, but what can you do when the bridge is being burned from the other end?
Congratulations, Arthur, on this comment above having been Instapundited.
Cheers,
Victoria who has straight, white teeth and a flush toilet
It's always interesting to get the European perspective on the quasi-socialist states in Latin America, and to reveal just how badly these countries are run. I wonder how this writer was able to obtain this insight with a byline from Washington DC?.....What, he wasn't talking about Cuba or Venezuela? Now I'm thoroughly confused.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा