Sunday, September 11, 2005
Forced Evacuations
I know everyone is pretty much Katrina'ed out. Just like we were Disengagement'ed out a few weeks before. So I thought what better angle than to combine two overdone issues? As word rose that New Orlean's officials intended to start forcefully evacuating hesitant residents, I couldn't help but recall those families torn from their Gaza homes. Some of you may recall that I wrote here that the government of Israel should not have forced anyone out. I said that they should have left the people to make their own (poor) decisions. So it may come as a surprise that I support the government's plan to extract all remaining people from the flood zone. Why not just let them live in filth? After all shouldn't that be their decision? Live or die, don't they have the right to choose the terms of their response?
The difference between New Orleans and Gaza has to do with the cost to the rest of society. In Gaza, the heavy costs were incurred by dragging everybody out. In New Orleans, greater costs will be associated by supporting those that remain. We can't just let people starve to death in their storm-torn homes. So that means we have to send food and medical care into these unsafe neighborhoods. It would be much cheaper to get these people to temporary shelter and care for them all there.
I'm not saying that we should reduce our assistance to the cheapest alternative. But I do believe that it is unfair for people to make choices selfishly, forcing society to subsidize their unsupportable decisions. And it makes it harder for us to just bulldoze the remainders of the accursed city to the ground.
The difference between New Orleans and Gaza has to do with the cost to the rest of society. In Gaza, the heavy costs were incurred by dragging everybody out. In New Orleans, greater costs will be associated by supporting those that remain. We can't just let people starve to death in their storm-torn homes. So that means we have to send food and medical care into these unsafe neighborhoods. It would be much cheaper to get these people to temporary shelter and care for them all there.
I'm not saying that we should reduce our assistance to the cheapest alternative. But I do believe that it is unfair for people to make choices selfishly, forcing society to subsidize their unsupportable decisions. And it makes it harder for us to just bulldoze the remainders of the accursed city to the ground.
# posted by Josh : Sunday, September 11, 2005
Comments:
<< Home
Funny, I was waiting for someone to make the connection between Katrina and Gush Katif.
# posted by 
: September 11, 2005 5:33 PM
: September 11, 2005 5:33 PM
EVERYONE has been making the connection between the two - including the bais yaakov teachers.
just curious - is this the same "anonymous" who posts on Lulei Demistafina?
just curious - is this the same "anonymous" who posts on Lulei Demistafina?
No, though that's a good blog name. If we sound similar and what he/she's saying is good then all I can say is baruch shekivnani (as a side point: Those who say baruch shekivanti are blessing themselves; they mean to say baruch hashem shekivanti).
# posted by : September 12, 2005 6:39 PM
: September 12, 2005 6:39 PM
Anon- Leave it to me to state the obvious.
MH - Don't hold it against me. I've been trying to get into Bais Yaakovs for years, with no success.
Erica - Fair question. I see numerous differences. The Gaza situation was entirely related to sovereignty. I don't see why a switch from Israeli to Palestinian REQUIRES an evacuation. You feel it is life threatening. The settlers can make their own choice. In New Orleans, the stragglers are by definition in danger, ie no food and disease. Just because they are ignorant of these problems does not keep them from being reality. In Gaza, the Palestinian government would take over responsibility for its new citizens safekeeping, legally. In New Orleans, the US remains responsible.
I for one don't know if we should hand out food to those holdouts in New Orleans. But either way, they'll either go steal to get food or they'll get diseases and spread them, so it becomes society's problem.
I'm probably leaving out some more differences. The bottom line, the danger the Gazan settlers would face under a Palestinian government is a matter of opinion. I would have left it up to the settlers to make that determination.
Post a Comment
MH - Don't hold it against me. I've been trying to get into Bais Yaakovs for years, with no success.
Erica - Fair question. I see numerous differences. The Gaza situation was entirely related to sovereignty. I don't see why a switch from Israeli to Palestinian REQUIRES an evacuation. You feel it is life threatening. The settlers can make their own choice. In New Orleans, the stragglers are by definition in danger, ie no food and disease. Just because they are ignorant of these problems does not keep them from being reality. In Gaza, the Palestinian government would take over responsibility for its new citizens safekeeping, legally. In New Orleans, the US remains responsible.
I for one don't know if we should hand out food to those holdouts in New Orleans. But either way, they'll either go steal to get food or they'll get diseases and spread them, so it becomes society's problem.
I'm probably leaving out some more differences. The bottom line, the danger the Gazan settlers would face under a Palestinian government is a matter of opinion. I would have left it up to the settlers to make that determination.
<< Home
