5 ms·

Houston's a very large place, and while there's bad stuff going on in places, there are also large parts of the city--probably most of it--with no particular da

Houston's a very large place, and while there's bad stuff going on in places, there are also large parts of the city--probably most of it--with no particular damage. I'm in the middle of it right now and know people and organizations all over and most have had little or no problem (though sadly I don't have to go too far in my social graph to find people who left their house via boat). The concept of a city-wide evacuation is, well, I'll be charitable and call it ignorant. Flooding here is nowhere near systematic enough for that to make sense. This is important to understand: the city remains largely intact and functional. The water's good, the power's on, the internet is on, two thirds of the grocery stores are open, emergency services are doing a great job, and some very large percentage of the city is just waiting for the damned rain to stop and the roads to clear to get back to normal. It's just not a wide-scale evacuation scenario. And I know what those look like. And so does the Mayor.

Rapzid 9y ago
The level of vitriol targeted towards the mayor, usually referred to as "democratic mayor Sylvester Turner", on the internet during the height of this disaster is pretty disgusting.
- mc32 9y ago
  It's just a sign of political polarization. Like when people say the republican governor of Texas [did something not aligned with Democrat values] when discussing liberal ideas.
  - forapurpose 9y ago
    I'm not going to agree that both sides are the same. There's a serious problem with conservatives demonizing and even dehumanizing those who don't follow their ideology, which IMHO lays the foundation for current conservative leaders. In the U.S. and Europe you can't find significant liberal leaders nearly as extreme and polarizing as many major conservative figures, some of whom are heads of state, nor liberal equivalents for white supremacy and extreme nationalism that are anywhere close to having the support to win power. The left-wing equivalent in the past would have been Communists, but they are very weak - there is no chance for a Communist to win office in any major country; even China's Communists are authoritarian capitalists who have retained the old brand name.
    - mc32 9y ago
      >nor liberal equivalents for white supremacy and extreme nationalism that are anywhere close to having the support to win power Win power? I hope not. Who would want any of those two choices. As for implied hate, well... I think Antifa is proving Jung's enantiodromia true: http://i.imgur.com/h1gpoI1.jpg http://i.imgur.com/h1gpoI1.jpg >even China's Communists are authoritarian capitalists who have retained the old brand name. That one is a little more nuanced than you present. They are communists except for some big areas of the economic system. However, there are many areas where they have not departed. How the party is run, how the country is organized and governed, how the people are controlled, 5-year plans, etc.
      - camillomiller 9y ago
        So basically they're Stalinists, which is very different from "true" Marxian communism (even better: it's a modern version of real socialism).
      - zimpenfish 9y ago
        > I think Antifa is proving Do you have any evidence linking those accounts to Antifa? Or any indication that they're Antifa? I might be missing it but I can't see anything in that image which justifies you linking it to Antifa...
      - forapurpose 9y ago
        > Win power? I hope not. Who would want any of those two choices I agree. I'm against both. My point is that there is no threat of that from the left right now, but perhaps the largest threat from the right since WWII. Antifa has no chance of gaining political power anywhere much less having advocates in the White House and other national capitals. > >even China's Communists are authoritarian capitalists who have retained the old brand name. > That one is a little more nuanced than you present. They are communists except for some big areas of the economic system. However, there are many areas where they have not departed. How the party is run, how the country is organized and governed, how the people are controlled, 5-year plans, etc. I don't know if I agree. They remain authoritarians (maybe becoming totalitarians) in those regards; they use the same structures that were used by Communists when they were ascendant in China and worldwide; but I'm not sure what is particularly Communist about all of that in the political ideological sense. I do know that Xi was reviving some of the ideological language, but that seemed more like a tool of obedience than something anyone took seriously. Capitalist authoritarians took over the Communist machine and decided it was easier to use the legacy tech. But maybe you know something I don't ...
ryanackley 9y ago
In hindsight, it worked out OK for most people. Most of the time it does. The problem is that sometimes it turns out really really bad. I'm from Florida and I worked in construction during college. I was down in South Florida after Andrew. Ground zero was like a warzone. No street signs, traffic lights, etc. Almost every single house was missing a roof. There was no place to buy fuel, food, and water. I saw a lot of human misery. Especially among the poorer population. It was like this for months because of the scale of devastation. We still feel the effects of Andrew in FL. We probably have the most stringent building codes in the country and the highest insurance rates. Major catastrophes like Andrew and Katrina are black swans. Nobody predicts the level of devastation ahead of time. It's usually hindisght, like "it was so obvious!". Therefore, I think it's ignorant to not at least advise people to evacuate at some point. Maybe not 2 hours before the storm hits. Days maybe? They always do advise evacuation of coastal regions here in FL. I always listen too.
- eximius 9y ago
  Katrina was not a poor prediction of the storm, it was the levee that broke combined with a depressed geometry that made it so disastrous. And we could not have advised people to evacuate days ahead. Thursday morning, it was just a tropical storm. Suddenly, around lunchtime, it was a category 3 and my business launched business continuity planning procedures. By the end of the day, it was a cat 4. It made landfall the next day. Evacuation would have only put those people outdoors when the storm hit.
  - ryanackley 9y ago
    You have made my point twice. Nobody predicted the levee was going to break. Nobody predicted Harvey would be a Cat 4 by the time it made landfall. There is no way to know which storm is going to be the "big one" until the aftermath. Therefore, we shouldn't assume there is no need to evacuate. Related news: a levee south of Houston was just breached. https://twitter.com/BrazoriaCounty/status/902539081841827842 https://twitter.com/BrazoriaCounty/status/902539081841827842
    - 9y ago
Spooky23 9y ago
Agreed. I was stuck as a tourist evacuating out of the South Carolina lowcountry, which has dramatically fewer people during the general evacuation for Matthew. It was a a nightmare experience that should always be avoided.

Rapzid 9y ago

The level of vitriol targeted towards the mayor, usually referred to as "democratic mayor Sylvester Turner", on the internet during the height of this disaster is pretty disgusting.

mc32 9y ago
It's just a sign of political polarization. Like when people say the republican governor of Texas [did something not aligned with Democrat values] when discussing liberal ideas.
- forapurpose 9y ago
  I'm not going to agree that both sides are the same. There's a serious problem with conservatives demonizing and even dehumanizing those who don't follow their ideology, which IMHO lays the foundation for current conservative leaders. In the U.S. and Europe you can't find significant liberal leaders nearly as extreme and polarizing as many major conservative figures, some of whom are heads of state, nor liberal equivalents for white supremacy and extreme nationalism that are anywhere close to having the support to win power. The left-wing equivalent in the past would have been Communists, but they are very weak - there is no chance for a Communist to win office in any major country; even China's Communists are authoritarian capitalists who have retained the old brand name.
  - mc32 9y ago
    >nor liberal equivalents for white supremacy and extreme nationalism that are anywhere close to having the support to win power Win power? I hope not. Who would want any of those two choices. As for implied hate, well... I think Antifa is proving Jung's enantiodromia true: http://i.imgur.com/h1gpoI1.jpg http://i.imgur.com/h1gpoI1.jpg >even China's Communists are authoritarian capitalists who have retained the old brand name. That one is a little more nuanced than you present. They are communists except for some big areas of the economic system. However, there are many areas where they have not departed. How the party is run, how the country is organized and governed, how the people are controlled, 5-year plans, etc.
    - camillomiller 9y ago
      So basically they're Stalinists, which is very different from "true" Marxian communism (even better: it's a modern version of real socialism).
    - zimpenfish 9y ago
      > I think Antifa is proving Do you have any evidence linking those accounts to Antifa? Or any indication that they're Antifa? I might be missing it but I can't see anything in that image which justifies you linking it to Antifa...
    - forapurpose 9y ago
      > Win power? I hope not. Who would want any of those two choices I agree. I'm against both. My point is that there is no threat of that from the left right now, but perhaps the largest threat from the right since WWII. Antifa has no chance of gaining political power anywhere much less having advocates in the White House and other national capitals. > >even China's Communists are authoritarian capitalists who have retained the old brand name. > That one is a little more nuanced than you present. They are communists except for some big areas of the economic system. However, there are many areas where they have not departed. How the party is run, how the country is organized and governed, how the people are controlled, 5-year plans, etc. I don't know if I agree. They remain authoritarians (maybe becoming totalitarians) in those regards; they use the same structures that were used by Communists when they were ascendant in China and worldwide; but I'm not sure what is particularly Communist about all of that in the political ideological sense. I do know that Xi was reviving some of the ideological language, but that seemed more like a tool of obedience than something anyone took seriously. Capitalist authoritarians took over the Communist machine and decided it was easier to use the legacy tech. But maybe you know something I don't ...

ryanackley 9y ago

In hindsight, it worked out OK for most people. Most of the time it does. The problem is that sometimes it turns out really really bad. I'm from Florida and I worked in construction during college. I was down in South Florida after Andrew. Ground zero was like a warzone. No street signs, traffic lights, etc. Almost every single house was missing a roof. There was no place to buy fuel, food, and water. I saw a lot of human misery. Especially among the poorer population. It was like this for months because of the scale of devastation. We still feel the effects of Andrew in FL. We probably have the most stringent building codes in the country and the highest insurance rates. Major catastrophes like Andrew and Katrina are black swans. Nobody predicts the level of devastation ahead of time. It's usually hindisght, like "it was so obvious!". Therefore, I think it's ignorant to not at least advise people to evacuate at some point. Maybe not 2 hours before the storm hits. Days maybe? They always do advise evacuation of coastal regions here in FL. I always listen too.

eximius 9y ago
Katrina was not a poor prediction of the storm, it was the levee that broke combined with a depressed geometry that made it so disastrous. And we could not have advised people to evacuate days ahead. Thursday morning, it was just a tropical storm. Suddenly, around lunchtime, it was a category 3 and my business launched business continuity planning procedures. By the end of the day, it was a cat 4. It made landfall the next day. Evacuation would have only put those people outdoors when the storm hit.
- ryanackley 9y ago
  You have made my point twice. Nobody predicted the levee was going to break. Nobody predicted Harvey would be a Cat 4 by the time it made landfall. There is no way to know which storm is going to be the "big one" until the aftermath. Therefore, we shouldn't assume there is no need to evacuate. Related news: a levee south of Houston was just breached. https://twitter.com/BrazoriaCounty/status/902539081841827842 https://twitter.com/BrazoriaCounty/status/902539081841827842
  - 9y ago

Spooky23 9y ago

Agreed. I was stuck as a tourist evacuating out of the South Carolina lowcountry, which has dramatically fewer people during the general evacuation for Matthew. It was a a nightmare experience that should always be avoided.