The meeting in Pahoa on 16JAN was disappointing to me on several levels. Embarrassing, even. While there were some present (on all sides of the issue) who spoke articulately and courteously --quite notably Elizabeth Weatherford-- there were also quite a few individuals who were foul-mouthed and discourteous. The general tenor of the crowd as a whole, unfortunately, reinforced the latter rather than the former.
Yes, there are all sorts of technical and economic arguments to be made on all sides. Yes, the overall process and the meeting on the 16th might have been improved with a different format and procedures (and an AV system which actually worked). Even so, I think we who live in Puna did not occupy the high ground in this discussion in any regard simply because of the intemperate manner in which so many comments were made and the unconstructive way much if not most of the crowd behaved. There is a significant difference between impassioned comment and idiotic vulgarity.
Instead of being a useful interaction with the bureaucrats and constituting a dialogue in which there was a genuine listening for concerns and alternatives, the presenters' body language reflected how they were swiftly closing ranks and tuning out that which was being said. By showing such egregious disrespect for the presenters many residents of Puna quickly lost whatever respect the presenters may have had for their comments. Indeed, within a matter of minutes it seemed to me the meeting had become a sad farce reinforcing a stereotype of crazed Punatics ranting inconsequentially. The defensive bureaucrats lockstepped through a slideshow simply in order to complete the legally-required checklist item of holding a public meeting. Yelling "F**K" this and "F**K" that, rudely and repeatedly interrupting, derisive mocking, and making personal attacks scored no positive points for Puna on this issue.
Matters were not helped that the presenters (state and county road bureaucrats and the hired project consultant) appeared conspicuously all of the same ethnic group, being very stone-faced and reserved, while speakers from the remarkably ethnically diverse crowd tended to actually physically advance toward the presenters in an aggressive manner, pointing fingers & gesticulating wildly in the air, shouting over the speakers' replies even before they had completed (or in some cases begun) answering. Especially when ethnically distinct groups are interacting it pays to make an extra effort toward courtesy, respect, and politeness -opening the possibility of a genuine dialogue, building mutual respect and understanding rather than shutting it down entirely. Actually, not only did a noisy portion of the audience shout over the presenters but they also prevented other audience members from equal time in asking questions and making comments; unless one was willing to be as rude as those dominating the discussion then it was all but impossible to get a word or question in edgewise. Elizabeth only managed to make her comment because the speaker had called upon her raised hand at random and then insisted repeatedly for quiet.
I appreciate the often colorful character and diverse nature of Puna; this diversity is part of why I choose to live as part of this eclectic community. I do not, however, appreciate slovenly conduct in public meetings. It is self-defeating. Those who seek to play us like a fish on the line &/or disregard the validity of our comments, though, have a very easy task indeed when a generally uncouth crew representing our community shows up and behaves as many individuals did on 16JAN.
)'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'(
Nina Paley's music video "All Creative Work Is Derivative"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcvd5JZkUXY&list=FLP7Vhr8C1-hS6BNSE3s6sMw&index=57&feature=plpp_video
)'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'( )'(
