Italy, FdCA Libertarian Alternative - Paternalism seismic (it)

The judgment on the L'Aquila earthquake of 2009, that sentenced in first instance Major 
Risks Committee, made quite a stir in the community especially national and international 
scientific. ---- We are not, by nature, on the side of magistrates but we nevertheless 
important shed light on how this story is lived in the media. First we say one thing: it 
is not true that the technical Commission were condemned for not have predicted the 
earthquake the night of 6 April 2009, at 3:32 am, struck the area of ??L'Aquila, killing 
more than 300 people. Opinion that this is been embraced worldwide by those who do not 
agrees with the judgment, especially those scientists and technicians who have even evoked 
ancient inquisitorial persecution. ---- In fact, the sentence is taken because the 
technicians have consciously and deliberately lied on the probability or not an event so 
catastrophic could happen.

On the other hand it is true that an earthquake is not
can be expected, paradoxically
It was precisely the Commission's technical
that, reassuring the population of L'Aquila,
implicitly produced a forecast
not occur.

So the misbehavior of technical
If anything there is in having developed a
forecast scientifically improper (just
because earthquakes can not be it
I do not foresee and predict) and, moreover,
has proved tragically wrong.

Going back in time, before
the swarm that from October
2008 was recorded in L'Aquila, the
Commission, a few days before the earthquake
April 6, 2009, resolves all with
hour meeting where we all say
a series of obviousness, including the unpredictability
earthquakes, but did not decide anything
(See the minutes of the Great Commission
Risks of 31 March 2009 on
http://abruzzo.indymedia.org/article/6327).

The technicians at that meeting stated that
the increase in seismic activity with the sequence
small repeated shocks do not necessarily
would suggest the occurrence of an event
catastrophic. This is true, to a swarm
earthquake does not always follow an earthquake
great energy, and it is also true that large
shocks are not always preceded by these
and other phenomena warning. However, often the
two phenomena are related, so why
was not applied the principle of healthy
precaution, coordinating at least one plan
Operating providing for greater
timeliness of relief, for example, with
strategic deployment of resources? (The Times
intervention in these cases are fundamental)
But mainly because, if you had not
sure whether an earthquake
could have happened or not, it is made safe
the population?

Probably, indeed certainly, the
interception of telephone conversations between the then
powerful head of the Civil Protection Bertolaso
and seismologist Enzo Boschi, there
provide answers to these questions: "... the
the truth is said to "order the undisputed leader
of the PC, and the technical obey. Citizens
L'Aquila, autoritaristicamente should not
to be informed, the citizens of L'Aquila,
paternalistically, should be reassured.

It is a standard practice in the management of
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
delegation of power to the ruling oligarchies,
economic, political and scientific. A
practice that together with the other characteristics
features of this system of power, such as the
private property, class privileges and
caste politics, mafia unions between institutions
Public and private businessmen, contributes to the
degradation of our land and insecurity
environmental opposite the natural espletarsi
geological phenomena.

Returning to the first-instance judgment,
that as often happens in Italy when
characters are involved in the power is
very likely to be reversed in the other
degrees of judgment, 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
territories from the geological point of view.
In fact, if we are to counter the effects of
earthquakes, as well as those of other disasters
geological, the only aspect that can be done
lever is prevention.

And do prevention means reducing the most
possible factors that contribute to
maintain a high seismic risk of a
given area and which depend on
answers that the company has in place. If
In fact, one can not intervene on the so-called
Seismic hazard because it depends on causes
objective related to seismicity natural
area, if not doing so it is
known more properly, to
as deepening in all territories
those aspects related to the effects of seismic site
able to amplify the seismic waves of
an earthquake, you could do much better
the seismic vulnerability of the built environment,
characteristic which expresses the propensity
construction to resist seismic actions.

And therein lies the big problem of seismic risk.

Many technicians territorial public bodies,
In fact, they admit candidly not
know all the Seismic Vulnerability
nearly all the buildings on the
their territories, and not just
private ones, but also the public
as schools and hospitals, in front of a
great age of the housing stock
Italian that for the majority (about 55%
on average up to 76% in large cities) is
was built before the entry into force
any anti-seismic regulations. On the other hand
in this beautiful country we have witnessed the fact
that buildings constructed in periods where
earthquake regulations exist (and this
is the case of industrial sheds Emilians
or the student's home in L'Aquila, or
the school of San Giuliano di Puglia, etc.
etc., etc.) have suffered damage to the collapse
structural, because the interests of an entire
public-private social bloc, composed
directors, fixers, palazzinari,
dedicated to the gain at the expense of safety
the built environment, has proved to be the most important
lives kept from buildings.

Yet the resources to carry out checks
seismic least sensitive of the buildings, there
would be, it would be enough to go for a little '
accounts in your pocket all administrations
state, central and local, to see how
spend in maintaining the army of consent
within companies or public
mixed capital or at the state spends
in new weaponry or the so-called
peacekeeping missions, or what is given
entrepreneurship of fake cooperatives
the outsourcing of services, or as it is
bestowed upon a massive army of managers
absolutely useless to the community, or, finally,
enough to recover a portion of the
evaded taxes in trade and free
professions, to name just a few examples.
It is here that the bully back mechanism
the delegation. We can not let the
hands of these fixers management
our territories, even from the point of view of
environmental safety.

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


November 2012 Working Group on Energy and
Environment FdCA