A-Infos (en) Italy, Paternalism seismic (it) [machine translation]

The judgment on the L'Aquila earthquake of 2009, which condemned in the first instance the 
High Risks Commission, has made quite a stir, especially in the scientific community 
nationally and internationally. ---- We are not, by nature, by the magistrates but we 
nevertheless important to be clear about how this story is lived in the media. ---- First 
of all there is to say one thing: it is not true that the engineers of the Commission have 
been condemned for not having predicted the earthquake the night of April 6, 2009, at 3:32 
am, struck the area of ââL'Aquila, causing deaths of more than 300 people. This opinion is 
also shared universally by those who disagree with the decision, especially by those 
scientists and engineers who have even evoked ancient inquisitorial persecution.

In fact, the sentence is taken because the technicians have knowingly and deliberately 
lied to the likelihood or not an event so catastrophic could happen. On the other hand it 
is true that an earthquake can not be predicted, paradoxically, were precisely the 
Technical Commission, reassuring the people of L'Aquila, implicitly produced a forecast 
not to occur.

Then there is the misbehavior of technical rather in having developed a forecast 
scientifically improper (because the earthquakes can not be expected and it will not 
provide) and, moreover, has proved tragically wrong.

Going back in time, in front of the swarm that from October of 2008 was recorded in 
L'Aquila, the Commission, a few days before the earthquake of April 6, 2009, resolves all 
with an hour of meeting where you say a number of obviousness, including the 
unpredictability of earthquakes, but did not decide anything. [1]

The technicians at that meeting stated that the increase in seismic activity with a 
succession of small repeated shocks was not necessarily suggest the occurrence of a 
catastrophic event. This is true, to a swarm does not always follow a major earthquake 
energy, and it is also true that large shocks are not always preceded by warning these and 
other phenomena. However, the two phenomena are often associated, so why was not applied 
the sound principle of precaution, coordinating at least one operational plan providing 
for a more timely relief, for example, with the strategic deployment of resources? (The 
timing of intervention in these cases are fundamental) But most of all, because if he had 
not sure whether an earthquake could happen or not, has reassured the population?

Probably, indeed certainly, the interception of telephone conversations between the then 
powerful head of the Civil Protection Bertolaso ââand seismologist Enzo Boschi, provide us 
with the answers to these questions: "... the truth does not say" the order ' undisputed 
leader of the PC, and technicians obey. The citizens of L'Aquila, autoritaristicamente 
should not be informed, citizens of L'Aquila, paternalistically, should be reassured.

It is a standard practice in the management of the power used by bureaucrats and techno 
bureaucrats of the state. A practice steeped in authoritarianism and paternalism, a 
practice that has deep roots in the tradition of the delegation of power to the ruling 
oligarchies, economic, political and scientific. A practice which, together with other 
characteristics of this system of power, such as private property, the privileges of class 
and caste politics, mafia unions between public institutions and private businessmen, 
contributes to the degradation of our land and environmental insecurity espletarsi front 
of the natural geological phenomena.

Returning to the first-instance judgment, which, as often happens in Italy when they are 
involved characters of power is likely to be reversed in the other sets of proceedings, 
there is a risk, however, that this SVII attention on the other great part of objective 
responsibility which contribute unsafe to make our cities and our lands from the 
geological point of view.

In fact, if we are to counter the effects of earthquakes, as well as those of other 
geological disasters, the only aspect that can lever is prevention.

And do prevention is to reduce as much as possible the factors that contribute to 
maintaining a high seismic risk in a specific area and which depend on the answers that 
the company has in place. If fact, we can not intervene on the so-called seismic hazard 
because it depends on objective causes related to the natural seismicity of an area, if 
not doing so is known that ever more adequately, for example, deepening in the territories 
all those aspects related to the effects of seismic site , can amplify the seismic waves 
of an earthquake, much could be done by improving the seismic vulnerability of the built 
environment, a feature that expresses the propensity of buildings to resist seismic actions.

And therein lies the big problem of seismic risk.

Many technicians territorial public entities, in fact, candidly admit they do not know all 
the seismic vulnerability of almost all the buildings present on their territories, and 
not only those individuals, but also the public, such as schools and hospitals, compared 
with considerable antiquity of the Italian building heritage that for most (about 55% on 
average and up to 76% in large cities) was built before the entry into force of any 
anti-seismic regulations [2].

On the other hand in this beautiful country we have witnessed the fact that buildings 
constructed in periods where the earthquake regulations exist (and this is the case of 
industrial buildings Emilia or the student's home in L'Aquila, or the School of San 
Giuliano di Puglia , etc., etc., etc.) have suffered damage to structural collapse, 
because the interests of an entire social bloc public-private, consisting of 
administrators, fixers, palazzinari, addicted to gain at the expense of safety built, was 
more important than the lives kept from buildings.

Yet the resources to perform seismic checks, at least sensitive of the buildings, there 
would be, it would be enough to go for a little 'accounts in your pocket at all central 
governments, central and peripheral, to see how much they spend to keep the army of 
consent to 'internal public companies or mixed or what the state spends on new weapons or 
so-called peacekeeping missions, or what is given to entrepreneurship of fake cooperatives 
with outsourcing services, or how much is paid out to a massive army of managers 
absolutely useless to the community, or, finally, would be enough to recover a portion of 
the taxes evaded in business and professions, to name just a few examples.

It is here that returns bully the mechanism of delegation. We can not leave in the hands 
of these fixers management of our territories, even from the point of view of 
environmental safety.

It is up to us, in fact, through the establishment of local self-government bodies based 
on cooperation between citizens and technical careful preservation of common goods such as 
the built heritage sensitive (eg schools and hospitals), and the safeguarding of social 
security, turn the situation, fielding forms of struggle that they know direct the 
collective resources generated by taxation, for example, otherwise directed by the central 
and local state organs to feed the privileges and waste of techno bureaucrats and 
businessmen, or those oriented to fuel spending military or maintain the huge, expensive 
and useless park management.

Federation of Anarchist Communists

Working Group on Energy and Environment
November 2012


Note:

1. See the minutes of the March 31, 2009 Major Risks of 
http://abruzzo.indymedia.org/article/6327
2. Source: http://www.architettibrescia.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/weekmailweb_2012_17.pdf

Related Link: http://www.fdca.it
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en