<Mick Winter Reviews Strahan's The Last Oil Shock The Oil Drum DrumBeat: August 5, 2007>

93 comments on A federal energy policy: can it happen here?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Aniya on August 5, 2007 - 2:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hi Bryan,

I'm a little confused about your Chomsky quote, when I look at the context, namely:

Chomsky:
"As to when you get a peak for OPEC, that's farther off - decades, but it's certainly real.

There's another side to this, there's a sense in which it's advantageous if the oil peak is earlier. The reason why is it will compel the world, primarily the U.S. here, to move toward something like sustainable energy.

If there's unbounded amounts of hydrocarbons, we're just going to destroy the environment for human life or most biological life, so the earlier the peak is, in some respects - yes, it could be catastrophic, it could also be beneficial."

I get three things from this:

1) Chomsky believes "the peak" for OPEC is "decades off".

2) It seems he has an unspoken premise that "sustainable energy" is possible, and

3) that "peak" will "compel the world, primarily the U.S. here" to move toward this..."sustainable energy".

So, I don't see in this a conclusion that finds a "silver lining" in mega-deaths.

I have different premises, and this isn't an argument I'd make. Still, given that they are his, I don't see a particular rejoicing here. Chomsky does have a kind of edge about him, in general - don't know that I can put my finger on it.

From the last sentence (in the above excerpt) I took away the conclusion that he "gets" that infinite growth is not possible.

re: "Therefore, discussion of state crimes is encouraged, and discussion of the people's crimes is taboo."

My recent experience convinces me, more than ever, that people are simply (and often) quite unaware of the impact of their "lifestyle", which after all, most people are born into, and by this I mean, psychologically, as well as materially.

I'm also more convinced than ever, at least my experience with "young persons" is - they care a lot, they are brave and willing and want to change once they become more aware.

People/we don't know they/we are "criminals", in other words.
And once they know, they/we want to change.

Of course, one (they/we) has to have an emotional basis that makes the experience of becoming aware a tolerable one. And this includes the emotional capacity (imagination) to change (IMHO).

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
bmcnett on August 5, 2007 - 5:11am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Aniya,

You are right that I had cherry-picked my Chomsky quote a bit. He is not openly advocating mass death per se. One point for you.

But, and I think there's little argument here, he and the rest of the left-wing media wax very euphemistic when it comes to the imminent end of fossil fuels.

They want to phrase it in terms that make the state look bad, and make the people look good, but the truth is not so clear, because it's the people who burn the majority of the fuels, and enjoy doing so.

The left generally refuses to discuss any future discontinuity in modern services for regular folks. of course they never discuss how 5/6 of humanity cann't survive the switchover from fossil to organic farming.

These things are taboo. Mention them at a left-wing party, and you aren't invited to the next one, so it's as if your idea never existed.

Bryan

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
oilmanbob on August 5, 2007 - 9:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Bryan:

The Daily Kos, which is a site that is about as "left wing" as you can get, is in total denial of peak oil, so is Moveon.org.

What I don't think you realise about peak oil is that its a scientific issue, a geological issue, and not a left or right wing issue. But there are ideologues on this issue who try to politicise the issue and the solutions. We also have groups who are alligned with the peak oil issue who are adopting the issue because they think that it will move their agenda along. That includes environmentalists, the global warming sorts, and the limits to growth people.

I'm what you would consider left wing. Bbut i'm a realist, and I don't want to argue politics. OK, thats BS, I do like to argue politics. But, I don't want my personal politics to contaminate working towards a solution. Its just too important.

The left's worst mistake in this is to confuse the truths about the real state of the oil industry. National oil companies, or socialised oil companies control 87% of the production in the world, and virtually all of the remaining places to wildcat. Even in the United States, the best remaining places are all federally controlled lands-the offshore areas and the national forests in the western United States. So when the left is hating on the big oil companies, they're looking at the wrong people.

The right's biggest mistake is to think that because a group is being opposed by the left, that are their natural allies and can therefore do no wrong.

What everbody needs to remember in the United States is that we all love our country. Anybody that is concerned about politics and cares enough to participate wants the best for the people of the United States and the people of the world. Only a fool refuses to recognise that the other side is occasionally right and has good ideas, and that looking at all sides to an issue helps everybody get a better perspective. I believe this is a real, unrecognised value in America. Its why most people split their votes and are happiest when no one group totally dominates our government.

The same is true for the rest of the world. All the decent citizens want everyone to be prosperous, to be happy, to be free and have secure societies. We all disagree about the best method, and so engage in the insanity of war, mostly to promote our crazy ideologies.

So, Bryan, lighten up! Give everyone a fair hearing, and we'll do the same for you.
Bob Ebersole

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
bmcnett on August 5, 2007 - 4:56pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Bob,

The mainstream and right-wing media are far less honest than the left-wing. I singled out the left-wing because they are especially prone to congratulate themselves for their lack of bias and taboo. In fact, they have a bias toward the people, and taboos against overshoot and depletion.

Overshoot and depletion are taboo in all media, not because they are technical, but because there is no way to tell them as a story that makes the audience look good, and makes others look bad.

Fundamental to all media - more fundamental than the facts - is the notion of good guys and bad guys.

It's so fundamental that Chomsky, a genius who's spent decades studying media and writing books bout how media works, has his own set of "good guys and bad guys" that is not subject to his own analysis: the people are good and the state is bad.

The problem with telling the "peak oil" story is that every single person on Earth, except maybe the hunter-gatherers, plays a bad guy in this story. You can't tell the story without offending the listener!

And if you tell it to a hunter-gatherer, he'll say "yeah, that's what we told you guys in the first place!"

:)

Bryan

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
john macklin on August 7, 2007 - 2:12am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Ahh ... thoughtful, really thoughtful, comments on a dead thread.

I recommend reading Paul Bloom of Yale, recently in Science and The Atlantic Monthly. He writes of children, and how they learn. Chomsky might listen.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
hightrekker on August 8, 2007 - 5:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Oilman--
Kos and MoveOn are supporters of Democrats, and are toward the political center, at best. Bonddad, who is Kos's economic blogger, is pro market capitalists, and would be considered on the Right in Western Europe.
These are hardly "Left Wing" perspectives---
But agreed-- The "Left" in the USA is very anti-scientific (people like Steven Pinker drive them crazy, with the exposure of the fallacy of the Blank Slate)--
That said, the Right is living in a economic fantasy land, in which thermodynamics is Satan, and delusion is a badge of honor--
They love the Suicide Economy, and want nothing to do with reality--
For some "Left Wing" perspectives, check Monthly Review or Daily Bleed---
Or, for a conservative Marxist perspective, check the RCP---
Adorno:
"If voting could change things , it would be illegal"

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

93 comments on A federal energy policy: can it happen here?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version