Wednesday, October 06, 2004

the politics of oil

We had a good -- if too brief -- discussion in one of my History 206 sections of the politics of oil the other day, and I thought I would point interested readers to a couple of recent articles.

Today in the Times, Tom Friedman has an EXCELLENT column, The Battle of the Pump. An excerpt:
Of all the shortsighted policies of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, none have been worse than their opposition to energy conservation and a gasoline tax. If we had imposed a new gasoline tax after 9/11, demand would have been dampened and gas today would probably still be $2 a gallon. But instead of the extra dollar going to Saudi Arabia - where it ends up with mullahs who build madrasas that preach intolerance - that dollar would have gone to our own Treasury to pay down our own deficit and finance our own schools. In fact, the Bush energy policy should be called No Mullah Left Behind.

Our own No Child Left Behind program has not been fully financed because the tax revenue is not there. But thanks to the Bush-Cheney energy policy, No Mullah Left Behind has been fully financed and is now the gift that keeps on giving: terrorism.

Mr. Bush says we're in "a global war on terrorism.'' That's right. But that war is rooted in the Arab-Muslim world. That means there is no war on terrorism that doesn't involve helping this region onto a more promising path for its huge population of young people - too many of whom are unemployed or unemployable because their oil-rich regimes are resistant to change and their religious leaders are resisting modernity.
Read the whole thing.

In the New Yorker, the great reporter John Cassidy writes in PUMP DREAMS, "Is energy independence an impossible goal?"
Although the Democratic and Republican energy plans differ widely, their underlying rationale is the same. In 2003, the United States consumed some twenty million barrels of oil a day, of which slightly more than half was imported from abroad, much of it from the Persian Gulf. By 2020, according to the Department of Energy, domestic oil producers will be meeting less than a third of United States needs, and the Gulf countries will be supplying up to two-thirds of the world’s oil. “This imbalance, if allowed to continue, will inevitably undermine our economy, our standard of living, and our national security,” the Bush Administration’s National Energy Policy Development Group warned in a May, 2001, report. “But it is not beyond our power to correct. America leads the world in scientific achievement, technical skill, and entrepreneurial drive. Within our country are abundant natural resources, unrivaled technology, and unlimited human creativity. With forward-looking leadership and sensible policies, we can meet our future energy demands and promote energy conservation, and do so in environmentally responsible ways that set a standard for the world.”

When energy independence is presented in this way, it is hard to object—who would advocate energy dependence?—but optimism and an appeal to American patriotism don’t add up to a coherent policy. Moving beyond rhetoric and actually trying to make America less reliant on foreign oil involves confronting powerful commercial interests, solving difficult technological problems, and convincing the American public that cheap fuel is not a birthright.

The two hundred and ninety million people who live in the United States make up just five per cent of the world’s population, but they consume a quarter of the world’s oil supply.
There's much more.

Over at Spacewar.com (via Tompaine.com), there is an interesting article by "Youssef M. Ibrahim , a former Middle East correspondent for the New York Times and Energy Editor of the Wall Street Journal, is managing director of the Dubai-based Strategic Energy Investment Group."

Finally, check out Michael Klare's new book Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

hey it's me again....the graduate....all i have to say about the politics of oil is to go check out where our middle east oil line plan goes and you'll understand the war...it goes straight from afghanistan into iraq....why did we declare war on afghanistan? terrorism or oil? btw we trained bin laden, but i'm sure you guys know that by now...and why did we leave afghanistan and go into iraq? that's where the plan for the oil line goes......that's the politics of oil right there....make up reasons to invade countries and occupy them so we can further ourselves along at the expense of others....what are we liberating them from? Are the people of Iraq actually better off with us there? I don't think so....look up on www.bushflash.com and go to thanks for the memories...it's very interesting....and for any of you into conspiracies...look into the freemasons and illuminati, especially the skull and bones (which bush belongs to and i was told that kerry does, too, but i haven't been able to find any proof about that one) but anyway...there's some interesting (and quite disturbing if it's true) stuff out there...

Anonymous said...

ok one more thing on the war (yes it's me again... i guess i miss college)...be aware of the draft! this was from punkvoter.com:

Congress brought up reinstating the draft legislation this week with only a few short days of session left to play politics and try and silence our voice about who is really fighting their war and why. (they tried to sneak this legislation onto the Congressional calander to say they are against a draft - but don't be fooled by a political vote - this is the same bunch of folks that lied to us about WMD and this war in the first place)

go to the site to find out more info and start fighting against it! Stand up and tell the government that we will not fight for their lies and greed!

"you gotta die, gotta die, gotta die for your government, die for your country that's shit!"
-anti flag