ca⋅lam⋅i⋅ty [kuh-lam-i-tee]
–noun, plural -ties.
1. a great misfortune or disaster, as a flood or serious injury.
2. grievous affliction; adversity; misery: the calamity of war.
We tend to think of calamities as being limited to force majeure events, but they can be people-caused, or having no particular cause, or anyone to blame. They just are calamities.
Events can conspire to cause a response that will be to one group's liking, but tragic to another. This is the case in New Zealand.
From Richard Shears (Mail Online, Expats' paradise lost in New Zealand's jobs crisis - just weeks after it was named best place to make a fresh start, July 6, 2009):
Only a few weeks ago, New Zealand was identified as the best place for British expats to make a fresh start.
It didn't take long for the accolade to wear thin.
The dreams of hundreds who left for a better life on the other side of the world are now turning into nightmares.
The expats face losing their jobs and being kicked out of the country because of the credit crunch and what is said to be a major shift in policy by the New Zealand government.
As Mr. Shears goes on to explain, New Zealand found itself in a Tragedy of the Commons like situation. During better times, it encouraged immigration to fill contract positions, when New Zealand did not have sufficient workforce to fill them. Now that the economies of the world, including New Zealand, have found themselves in a downturn, with too many workers and not enough jobs, New Zealand made a tough decision. They decided to implement a "Kiwis First" job program.
Further, New Zealand refused to place the ex-pat Britons on the dole, making the only option available to the Britons to return home. When they find themselves back on the Little Isle, they're last on the list for everything, making their untenable situation a tragedy.
It is easy to be sympathetic to both sides of this issue.
New Zealand's government, as with all governments, has a responsibility to put the interest of its citizens first. It also has the fiscal duty not to incur additional expense when it is not necessary to do so, when they cannot afford it. Putting the out-out-work contract laborers on welfare would have been irresponsible, as the length of the economic downturn is unknowable. Crystal-ball gazing and predicting that the economy would improve in X months would be wrong headed.
Leaving one's country to seek one's fortune has always been risky, some more risky than others. When the first colonists came to America, they all died. It wasn't until the late 17th century that colonists were able to make a go of it. We tend to forget about the risk and the failures, choosing to remember only those who found their fortunes when they embarked on such lofty and idealistic endeavors.
The Britons who made their way to New Zealand should be grateful that death was not their fate, but that would be a small consolation for their economic plight.
These would be interesting debate subjects if we weren't talking about it happening to real people, people who risked everything and lost.
Many governments are going to have to make similar choices in the near future, as unemployment continues to rise, and they face the potential for riots and violence against those thought to be taking their jobs. Those who find themselves like the poor Britons, are not welcomed with open arms when they return to their homelands. They're often thought to be traitors or unpatriotic upon their return. This is further complicated by Britain's risk aversion character, and their historical tendency to shun people who attempt to rise above their appointed station.
Britons are not the only ones facing deportation, expatriation, or "Citizens First" decisions. Riots in South Africa have been occurring for these same reasons.
Civil and world wars have begun for less.
Posts
