Mal-development (as opposed to apt or good development) has been more responsible for resilience depletion of vulnerable communities than natural hazards. This, as Cultural Theory argues, is also due to development programs decided by hegemonic institutions without sufficient “Toad’s Eye Science”, i.e., a rather top-down approach that filters out “uncomfortable knowledge” of conditions at the grassroots level. Exacerbating the situation is, in the larger scheme of the overall water cycle, a narrow focus on Blue (river) water ignoring White (atmospheric “sky rivers”) and Brown (underground) waters. The basic argument of this paper is that pluralizing the discourse, giving voice at the policy table to all three social solidarities of market individualism, agency hierarchism and activist egalitarianism together with their different perspective on risk and justice, responding to them in a spirit of constructive engagement, and seeking not consensus but compromise would lead to resilience enhancement and better preparedness the next time disasters strike.