Monday, September 05, 2005

The proximate cause

Writing in the Chicago Tribune, Dennis Byrne wonders “Why do we always assign blame?”

Maybe the finger-pointing comes from today's mindset that someone else always must be ready and in charge of ensuring our safety and comfort. Or from an arrogance that we can plan in advance for every imaginable catastrophe. Or maybe it is simply partisan and ideological bunk, opportunistically tossed Bush's way.

This is no apologia for the many possible misjudgments and mistakes that might have been made. Rather it is a disagreement with the simplistic view that "they" can prevent or ameliorate every imaginable calamity. And if "they" don't, it's proof of someone's incompetence, greed or callousness.

We can't always blame everything on someone. Sometimes the greatest talent, deepest caring and best intentions can simply be overwhelmed; it's not someone's fault.
This is right in line with my Occam’s Razor post below about sometimes we should damn the hurricane and focus on the rescue efforts. The blame game feeds into moral vanity and political gamesmanship that helps nobody.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Cry me a flooded river. First, how suspicious that such magnaminity ("moral vanity and political gamesmanship that helps nobody") only gets an airing when it's Bush in trouble. We heard the same claptrap from the Democratic side whenever Clinton was up against it and the GOP was howling.

Usually Frank Rich is a tiresome liberal speakerbox, but he got it right this week:

"The President told Diane Sawyer that he hoped "people don't play politics during this period of time." Presumably that means that the photos of him wistfully surveying the Katrina damage won't be sold to campaign donors as the equivalent 9/11 photos were."

Tell us more fairytales about "moral vanity" and "political gamesmanship."