Knowing when to fold 'em

Some time ago I watched a PBS program called Who Cares if Bangladesh Drowns, that discussed the fact that that country, presumably to a large extent because of global warming, is being reclaimed by the sea. So much of the land lies at sea level, and when the annual monsoon arrives the people are finding themselves more thoroughly inundated than ever, and for longer periods, with great loss of homes, life, safe drinking water. The number one cause of death for children 1-4 years of age is...not malnutrition, as in so many poverty-riddled countries...but drowning. The gentleman who made the film was making a plea for the countries of the world to come together and do something about global warning. Save Bangladesh.

While I certainly agree that doing something about global warming is an important goal, it isn't going to happen quickly, may not happen to a sufficient extent to save much of the coastal land throughout the world that is threatened, including Bangladesh. The only real solution, it seems to me, is for people to stop living in these places! New Orleans is another example. After Katrina/Rita, I was one of those who thought we should just forget about resurrecting what had, indeed, been a unique, fascinating city, but a city built, not on sand, but on even more untrustworthy water. A city whose time has probably passed. I questioned then, and still question, whether it is worth it to try to rebuild what could quite possibly be wiped out again, in the not-that-distant future...after expending great gobs of money and effort. Wouldn't it make more sense -- wouldn't it actually be cheaper -- to help the citizens and institutions relocate?

According to the doom and gloom fellows, many, many places that lie along continental coasts are going to find that their days are numbered. In the case of low-lying Bangladesh, it's a third of a whole country. And yes, yes, there's the question for all of them of what to do with all the displaced people. In the case of Bangladesh, the narrator informed us that neighboring India cannot take a huge influx of people. The majority of Bangladesh citizens share a religion with Pakistan -- indeed, Bangladesh was originally called East Pakistan, after the division of India -- but the topography and culture of arid, mountainous Pakistan is a long way from that of humid, water-oriented Bangladesh. And of course, people don't want to leave what has always been "home." (See my Note of June 9, 2008). But people have emigrated, throughout history and pre-history, when conditions at "home" proved sufficiently intolerable. I think we have to start thinking in those terms as regards factors other than economic. If you're living at the foot of a live volcano, get the hell out of there. If you're living on a major fault line, get the hell out of there. If you're living in a city or, alas, a country, that is fighting a losing battle with the sea, for heaven's sake go someplace else. Maybe with a little help from your friends, i.e., other countries, other cities.

I remember when I lived in Boston, and the occasional hurricane would come through, wreaking the natural havoc, especially to homes built right on the coast. I would always feel irritated with those people who expected government help in restoring their homes. What, I would think, help you rebuild so the same thing can happen in three or four years? Do humans never learn!!

What humans are slow in learning, I think – or perhaps accepting would be a better word – is that the planet is really in charge. We can influence the weather – witness global warming – but we can't control it. We can't control the inner workings of the planet, that express themselves through volcanoes and earthquakes and tsunamis. All we can do is stay out of the way.