By DAVID BROOKS
Published: September 1, 2005

Hurricanes come in two waves. First comes the rainstorm, and then comes what the historian John Barry calls the "human storm" - the recriminations, the political conflict and the battle over compensation. Floods wash away the surface of society, the settled way things have been done. They expose the underlying power structures, the injustices, the patterns of corruption and the unacknowledged inequalities. When you look back over the meteorological turbulence in this nation's history, it's striking how often political turbulence followed.
 
In 1889 in Pennsylvania, a great flood washed away much of Johnstown. The water's crushing destruction sounded to one person like a "lot of horses grinding oats." Witnesses watched hundreds of people trapped on a burning bridge, forced to choose between burning to death or throwing themselves into the churning waters to drown.

The flood was so abnormal that the country seemed to have trouble grasping what had happened. The national media were filled with wild exaggerations and fabrications: stories of rivers dammed with corpses, of children who died while playing ring-around-the-rosy and who were found with their hands still clasped and with smiles still on their faces.

Prejudices were let loose. Hungarians then were akin to today's illegal Mexican immigrants - hard-working people who took jobs no one else wanted. Newspapers carried accounts of gangs of Hungarian men cutting off dead women's fingers to steal their rings. "Drunken Hungarians, Dancing, Singing, Cursing and Fighting Amid the Ruins" a New York Herald headline blared.

Then, as David McCullough notes in "The Johnstown Flood," public fury turned on the Pittsburgh millionaires whose club's fishing pond had emptied on the town. The Chicago Herald depicted the millionaires as Roman aristocrats, seeking pleasure while the poor died like beasts in the Coliseum.

Even before the flood, public resentment was building against the newly rich industrialists. Protests were growing against the trusts, against industrialization and against the new concentrations of wealth. The Johnstown flood crystallized popular anger, for the fishing club was indeed partly to blame. Public reaction to the disaster helped set the stage for the progressive movement and the trust-busting that was to come.

In 1900, another great storm hit the U.S., killing over 6,000 people in Galveston, Tex. The storm exposed racial animosities, for this time stories (equally false) swept through the press accusing blacks of cutting off the fingers of corpses to steal wedding rings. The devastation ended Galveston's chance to beat out Houston as Texas' leading port.

Then in 1927, the great Mississippi flood rumbled down upon New Orleans. As Barry writes in his account, "Rising Tide," the disaster ripped the veil off the genteel, feudal relations between whites and blacks, and revealed the festering iniquities. Blacks were rounded up into work camps and held by armed guards. They were prevented from leaving as the waters rose. A steamer, the Capitol, played "Bye Bye Blackbird" as it sailed away. The racist violence that followed the floods helped persuade many blacks to move north.

Civic leaders intentionally flooded poor and middle-class areas to ease the water's pressure on the city, and then reneged on promises to compensate those whose homes were destroyed. That helped fuel the populist anger that led to Huey Long's success. Across the country people demanded that the federal government get involved in disaster relief, helping to set the stage for the New Deal. The local civic elite turned insular and reactionary, and New Orleans never really recovered its preflood vibrancy.

We'd like to think that the stories of hurricanes and floods are always stories of people rallying together to give aid and comfort. And, indeed, each of America's great floods has prompted a popular response both generous and inspiring. But floods are also civic examinations. Amid all the stories that recur with every disaster - tales of sudden death and miraculous survival, the displacement and the disease - there is also the testing.

Civic arrangements work or they fail. Leaders are found worthy or wanting. What's happening in New Orleans and Mississippi today is a human tragedy. But take a close look at the people you see wandering, devastated, around New Orleans: they are predominantly black and poor. The political disturbances are still to come.

E-mail: dabrooks@nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/01/opinion/01brooks.html?ex=1126238400&en=228755ffb6f5ed9b&ei=5070&emc=eta1

[This is Correct!]

"I think the point being driven home is that culturally and from a personalized experience of sufferation and downpression, the white person who comes foward amongst InI; lacks the vision, overstanding and creativity for leadership or a certain self actualisaion that is organically sui generis in epistemology. In such a situation as in any learning process things constantly have to be explained, clarified and regurgitated; which can be oftentimes draining for the black person.  

Hence as a cultural actor, a white person has to be constantly getting feedback and explanations as different phenomenon and situations occur. This is in order for the white person to make the most appropriate decision while maintaining the proper perspective. Without the aforesaid, helping becomes counter productive or detrimental for those on the receiving end. It is quite hard if not impossible for a white person mixed in the melieu of White Supremacy to break free of these institutional mega-structures and other imposing programings manifested in the environment."

This is Correct!

I could not let it fly. It is funny as she is like many whites who come to Africa Speaks.

--Ayinde

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Princess denies racism claims

By Robert Jobson Royal Correspondent
23 July 2004

Princess Michael of Kent today insisted she is not a racist, claiming she once disguised herself in a bid to experience life as an African "half-caste".

The revelation comes after the woman dubbed "Princess Pushy" was accused of telling a group of black New Yorkers to "go back to the colonies" after a row in a restaurant.

She denied the "wicked" claim, which she described in a TV interview as a "knife in the heart".

She said she once dressed as a black woman on a trip to Africa to try to see at first hand what black people have to face. Denying she is a racist, the Princess said: "Its such a wicked thing to say to me because it is against everything I believe in, against everything I have worked for.

"I even pretended years ago to be an African, a half-caste African of course. With my light eyes I didn't get away with it." She added: "I dyed my hair black and I travelled on an African bus. I wanted to be a writer, I wanted the experience ... from Cape Town right up to northern Mozambique. I had adventures with these absolutely adorable, special people.

"To call me a racist is ... it's a knife in my heart, because I really love these people and have done so much, I think probably more than most people I know, for Africans - and, well, you know, what can you do. You grin and bear it," she said.

She was speaking to John Stapleton in an interview for ITV1's My Hymns, to be broadcast on Sunday. But the remarks are sure to reignite the racism row - because the expression "half-caste" is regarded as an insult to those of mixed race.

She also insists that the New York incident was a "misunderstanding".

The Princess - whose husband Prince Michael is the Queen's cousin - was dining at the Da Silvano restaurant in Sixth Avenue when she asked people at a nearby table to be quiet.

She says she asked the "African-American revellers" politely to be "a little bit quieter so that we could just hear the menu". She added: "They thought it was hilarious. I suppose they never heard 'pleases' and 'do you minds'."

She says she told the management she wanted to move, at which point another table was found near the kitchen, which

was described to her as being "in Siberia". "And I said: "Siberia? at this point I'd be ready to go back to the colonies," she tells Stapleton.

"Now I was unaware, and probably should have been aware, that 'colonies' is a pejorative term in America and, you know, the last thing that I would do is to offend, to people I don't know.

"I am not rude. I think the bottom line is that it's a question of manners. Well, misunderstandings occur - people can mishear things."

The Princess was labelled a "royal bigot" by the New York Post newspaper, with one of the diners, Nicole Young, claiming that minutes after her arrival, the Princess "reached over and just slammed her open palm down on our table.

"She said, 'Enough already! You need to quiet down." It was then, Ms Young claimed, that the Princess insulted the group, leaning towards one of them, pumping her fist and saying: "You need to go back to the colonies!"

In the TV interview, the princess also hits out at critics who say she and her husband pay only a peppercorn rent to live at Kensington Palace.

She tells Stapleton that she chose the "smallest apartment" and says she only has two "dailies" to help maintain it - and she does the cooking herself.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/12140544?source=Evening%20Standard

Another:

http://www.itv.com/news/957773.html

[Volatile, moi? I think I'm just a bit high-spirited, says Princess Pushy]

Volatile, moi? I think I'm just a bit high-spirited, says Princess Pushy

CAROLINE GAMMELL



PRINCESS Michael of Kent has rejected claims that she is racist despite being accused of telling a group of noisy diners sitting next to her in a New York restaurant to "go back to the colonies".

No stranger to controversy, the wife of the Queen's first cousin - dubbed Princess Pushy - claimed she had never been accepted in the UK because she is foreign.

Talking about the negative media coverage, she said: "I don't think it's my place to explain myself. But, I think (it's because) I'm foreign, which is never quite accepted I think. I have different ways of saying things and doing things.

"I'm half-Hungarian, which implies that I am volatile - not really, I think I'm rather high-spirited."

She insisted she had not made the comment and the exchange of words between the two parties had simply been a misunderstanding.

The princess was at the Da Silvano restaurant on Sixth Avenue in May when she asked people at a nearby table to be quiet.

She told her companions they would have to go somewhere else because of the noise and one went off in search of a table. On his return he said there was a table, but that it was "in Siberia".

In an interview with John Stapleton on ITV1's My Favourite Hymns, to be broadcast on Sunday, the princess said: "I was standing, ready to go and I said, 'Siberia? At this point I would be ready to go back to the colonies'.

"Now, I was unaware, and I probably should have been aware, that "colonies" is a pejorative term in America."

The princess, 59, said being dubbed a racist was like "a knife through the heart" and added: "This is against everything I believe in, everything I have worked for."

Princess Michael went on to say she had a love for Africa and the African people.

She said: "I even pretended years ago to be an African, a half-caste African, but - because of my light eyes - I did not get away with it, but I dyed my hair black. I travelled on African buses, I wanted to be a writer, I wanted experiences from Cape Town right up in Mozambique.

"I had this adventure with these absolutely adorable special people and to call me racist - it's a knife through the heart because I really love these people."

But one of the diners who rowed with the Royal in the New York restaurant was not impressed. Nicole Young, a fashion TV reporter and PR consultant, rejected the princess's version of events. She said when she confronted the princess about her "colonies" remark 20 minutes after it was made, the message was "quite clear".

"I was so completely insulted, there was no possible way that I could walk away and let it go," she said.

"This is New York. This is 2004. It was completely inappropriate.

"We definitely didn't misunderstand what she said."

In the same interview, Princess Michael also revealed how she was "blown away" to discover that her son, Lord Freddie Windsor, had taken cocaine.

She said: "My children have always been very anti-drugs, so when my son was accused of taking cocaine in his first year at Oxford I was blown away.

"I said, 'Is this true?' and he said, 'Yes, it is true, it happened'."

She said her son was talking against drugs when he was challenged by a group of people who would not listen to him because he had not tried the drug. He took the cocaine to silence his critics, his mother claimed.

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=846102004

OH REALLY!

Can Americans really afford to be so naive and ignorant?

If your response is any reflection of the quality of Dean's support then he is already in real trouble. He lost the election before it started.

what color our eyes and skin are now and our present condition and status are only a direct result of past life actions and choices, thoughts and deeds....so those suffering now earned that, those not, likewise...

This thoughtlessness only means that many more will be killed at the hands of the present, and future U.S. administrations.

Ok, so you are supporting Dean, and want to get rid of Bush. That’s all there is to it in your ‘mind’. Everyone else should do likewise, and without question or challenge give support to Dean. Even if some others on this site do not reside in the US, you should be aware that the US has long been exporting its corruption and Terror, and that is long before the Bushies. They usually use other countries as their testing ground for their weapons of mass destruction. Previous US administrations have also overthrown elected leaders in other countries. I don’t feel I need to go into all the history here, as I am sure if you check the Internet you may see it published all over.

Tell me, which people on earth should not question the caliber of person or moron who vies for leadership in the US? When has the US left any country, except those without valuable minerals, to organize and manage their own affairs? I am simply saying that every person on earth can find reasons to challenge anyone who wants to be President in the US.

From your responses, I gather that you believe support should be given to your preferred candidate because we want to get Bush out of office. Please tell me, how does this deal with the core issues that affect most people, as was highlighted in my first response?

In my mind, Bush and his supporters are the product of the US miseducation system, and media manipulations, and simply changing him does not solve the problem of US arrogance, and terror on many other countries.

Before asking for the support of sensible people, try giving us your plan for a change in foreign policy. How about paying reparations to people who are/were affected? Where is the plan to arrest those who illegally invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and are now ‘profiting’ from these brutal invasions?

I have highlighted some issues, so how about responding to that?

Is this how Dean's supporters intend to deal with critics?

I am sure you speak for many, but CERTAINLY NOT for informed people. Of course you don’t mind going back to the same old U.S. policy of doing the same as Bush, but not in such an obvious manner. That will suffice many I am sure, so they can just preach the dishonest and hypocritical, "we are one people" while covertly doing the same as Bush.

If you are a Rasta (I have my doubts there) you should be ashamed to join the forum, and not be able to at least use a little more than your emotions in a response.

Anyhow, you are already part of the majority who view critically examining history as promoting negativity.

When you have some time, please try a real response. How about telling us Dean’s or your plan for ending racism, gender biases, corruption (especially government corruption), and U.S. aggression worldwide.

[[link=http://www.rootsie.com/articles/18082003.html]No Colorless Rastafari Movement[/link]]

Also Read: [link=http://www.rootsie.com/articles/18082003.html]No Colorless Rastafari Movement[/link]