September 5, 2005

Dear Colleague,

         David Brooks of The New York Times perceptively compared the World Trade Towers disaster of 9/11 with the Katrina hurricane disaster of last week. The one unified the nation, the other threatens to tear it apart; the one had a hero, Mayor Giuliani, the other is singularly lacking in a central heroic figure; the one affected a sophisticated, multi-national population, the other affected primarily the black and the poor; the one showcased American efficiency, the other reveals shocking bureaucratic confusion and bungling; and, of course, the one was caused by evil men, and the other by Nature.

         What are and will be the consequences of the Katrina hurricane disaster? A new sense of vulnerability? A sharp re-orientation of American focus toward domestic rather than foreign issues? A revival of the 'seventies passion for social justice? A downturn in the economy leading to a re-evaluation of the "good life"? Or, as the administration might wish, a return to business as usual? I am not pundit enough to throw light on any of these questions. I do have, however, a small contribution to make, and it is this. To rally the people, one has to speak with conviction and eloquence, and nothing makes it easier to do so than to have a clear enemy in view. After the 9/11 tragedy, even George W. Bush spoke reasonably well. He was able to stand at the site of the fallen Towers, point to specific evil doers—the airplane hijackers and Al-Queda behind them—and urge that Americans and indeed righteous people all over the world to join forces to fight for their eradication. But who is the bad guy in the hurricane disaster? Bush, after the briefest visit to some less badly afflicted sites, spoke at the New Orleans Airport with a clumsiness unusual even for a C student at Yale. He abandoned a line of thought in mid-speech, and actually grinned as he boasted of the steps governmental agencies had taken. But could even Reagan or Clinton have spoken effectively without a specific enemy?

         Rather than calling the Gulf Coast hurricane a member of the Axis of Evil (along with California earthquake and Dakota drought), to be tamed by the might of the Corps of Engineers, we give it the rather charming name of Katrina! Nature is good, in America; it is dolphins at play, wild flowers, the gentle breeze of spring, the majesty of granite cliffs. But Nature is neither good or evil, it is simply indifferent. The environmental movement, necessary and virtuous as it is, has given us an unbalanced view of Nature, making it altogether too benign. One result is that whereas we may be well prepared to fight the human terrorists in our midst, we let down our guard against the terrorism of Nature.

         And where are the Pat Robertsons when we need them? Are they going to call the Gulf Coast calamity an Act of God, thus making God into a monster, or are they going to blame it all on gay marriage? God, sorry to say, is no newcomer to genocide, if one reads the Bible literally. After all, he flooded not only the New Orleans of his time, but the entire creation—saving only a few favorites—when it displeased him.

Best wishes,

Yi-Fu