This is a historic occurrence, marking the first time that New York City has canceled the marathon since its beginning in 1970. The event has persevered through heat, humidity, and freezing rain. Even the 2001 race, two months after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, went ahead in the kind of we're-still-here response that the War on Terror group discussed in class on Friday. Local authorities say that holding the race would be detrimental to aiding those hit hardest by the storm, but others state that now, as eleven years ago, the race would be a morale boost to the entire city. NYC responds to this by saying the marathon has divided the city already, contrary to its purpose. Then beyond the morale and morality arguments are the economic ones. Thousands of people flew to New York expecting a marathon; how are they to be reimbursed?
It is my opinion that the race should go forward, as a demonstration that even the power of Mother Nature can't stop the city that never sleeps. There ought to be a way to have the race without interfering with disaster relief, and that the city of New York's motivation is simply that it wishes to deal with one crisis at a time. While prioritization is a wonderful tool, couldn't they just delay the race, instead of immediately resorting to such a drastic step as cancellation? Feel free to comment with any ideas you have.
It is my opinion that the race should go forward, as a demonstration that even the power of Mother Nature can't stop the city that never sleeps. There ought to be a way to have the race without interfering with disaster relief, and that the city of New York's motivation is simply that it wishes to deal with one crisis at a time. While prioritization is a wonderful tool, couldn't they just delay the race, instead of immediately resorting to such a drastic step as cancellation? Feel free to comment with any ideas you have.
No comments:
Post a Comment