"He who sows the wind..."
During the 1980 Presidential campaign on the campus of my alma mater, Concordia College (now University) in River Forest, Illinois, I was involved in a group called Voters Organized to Elect Somebody, or Project VOTES. The idea was to combat student apathy regarding the election, and supporters of all three major candidates pooled their efforts to that end.
One of our professors gave a presentation at one of our weekly events outlining what, in his view, was "really going on" in the world, and giving his critique of the foreign policy of the candidates. One of his observations was that "the Arab world is enjoying a temporary ascendancy" because of oil.
I remember thinking at the time that he was right about the ephemeral nature of that oil-based influence on world affairs. A nation with the technological history and resources of the United States would not forever consent to be subject to energy blackmail. Sooner or later-especially if OPEC and its member states played hardball with the United States, or tried to use energy as a means of pushing us around- we would find a way to render Middle Eastern oil irrelevant.
The consequences would not simply be a drastic reduction in the Arab world's influence on the world stage. Their economies would not exactly prosper, either. All in all, it seemed to me that they were playing a short-sighted game.
Despite all the hysterical raving of the Left through the years about how the current administration is in thrall to American oil interests, President Bush is proposing that we do exactly that- and stating in so many words that we are already on the point of succeeding.
My only question- and it's addressed to presidents of both parties- is, "What took us so long?"
Well, that... and what the Arab world is going to use to drive its economy in the post-petroleum age.
One of our professors gave a presentation at one of our weekly events outlining what, in his view, was "really going on" in the world, and giving his critique of the foreign policy of the candidates. One of his observations was that "the Arab world is enjoying a temporary ascendancy" because of oil.
I remember thinking at the time that he was right about the ephemeral nature of that oil-based influence on world affairs. A nation with the technological history and resources of the United States would not forever consent to be subject to energy blackmail. Sooner or later-especially if OPEC and its member states played hardball with the United States, or tried to use energy as a means of pushing us around- we would find a way to render Middle Eastern oil irrelevant.
The consequences would not simply be a drastic reduction in the Arab world's influence on the world stage. Their economies would not exactly prosper, either. All in all, it seemed to me that they were playing a short-sighted game.
Despite all the hysterical raving of the Left through the years about how the current administration is in thrall to American oil interests, President Bush is proposing that we do exactly that- and stating in so many words that we are already on the point of succeeding.
My only question- and it's addressed to presidents of both parties- is, "What took us so long?"
Well, that... and what the Arab world is going to use to drive its economy in the post-petroleum age.
Comments
Well, that... and what the Arab world is going to use to drive its economy in the post-petroleum age.
A more relevant question for me would be: What will back the US Dollar in a post-patroleum economy?
I think you will find this speech interesting. It is another key to understanding oil. I'm just starting to learn the history of the US Dollar, it makes me nervous.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm
Maybe...
As I understand Ron Paul, one of the reasons people are willing to accept U.S. pieces of paper in exchange for something of real value is that they know they can turn around and exchange the paper for something of real value, a barrel of mid-eastern oil, which you can only buy with U.S. paper. Right now the rest of the world needs the Dollar to buy mid-east oil.
If a new energy alternative is to serve the same function, it would a) have to have real value to the rest of the world, and b) only available in U.S. dollars.
b) might be possible (in the short term) if the US is the exclusive producer of the new energy, because of a super-secret formula, or if it takes significant technology and infrastructure, or a great plains to grow switchgrass.
If the rest of the world does not need the dollar to buy something they value, they could stop accepting it and the dollar would drop like a rock.
Let me find you a filly for your proud stallion seed
To keep the old line going.
And we'll stand you abreast at the back of the wood
Behind the young trees growing
To hide you from eyes that mock at your girth,
And your eighteen hands at the shoulder
And one day when the oil barons have all dripped dry
and the nights are seen to draw colder
They'll beg for your strength, your gentle power
Your noble grace and your bearing
And you'll strain once again to the sound of the gulls
In the wake of the deep plough, sharing.
["Heavy Horses"]