by Dreams End » Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:11 am
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>So many unfounded claims and allegations, where to start. Why bother, i also ask myself, when y'all are so attached to your infinite earth fantasies, it feels like breaking the 'no santa' news to children. So i'm going to start with "who benefits", then maybe do the boring rebuttals of misinformed opinion later.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Is it inherent in Peak Oil to be patronizing to those who don't agree with you? I get that a lot. But thank you for deigning to linger a bit longer with us mortals. <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Dreams end wants y'all to forget the wars in Iraq, Columbia, & Sudan, all coincidentally big oil exporters, forget that we (meaning the White West) daily import huge volumes of food, timber, oil, gas, gold, titanium, copper, you name it, from the 'less developed' world, while they starve and die in their millions.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Gosh, wintler, ya found me out. Though, I have to say, the Peak Oil folks of ASPO have put forward a pretty horrific plan that you don't seem to have much problem with. I, on the other hand, am arguing that Peak Oil is a construct created by elites...especially oil companies, from whom this data comes. You have confused this with arguing for capitalism. I can understand your confusion, as many Peak Oilers tend to see Peak Oil as the only issue on the planet.<br><br>So I'll be clear. I am against capitalism...which, by the way, is why I don't trust the oil industry to tell the truth and think them fully capable of lying to meet their own agenda or in concert with other agendas. And since some of the people pushing Peak Oil are OPENLY suggesting a die off of all those countries that were previously dependent on aid of developed nations, I'd think your sentiment about me would apply quite well to them. <br><br>Meanwhile, the military domination the US seeks of oil rich nations does not prove there is peak oil...only that oil is a valuable resource and the US would like to control as much of it as possible. Actually, it's probably more accurate to say that they are simply opening up resources for the oil companies themselves to more freely exploit. If you haven't noticed, the people currently pretending to run the country are all oillionaires. No wonder Bush does much of the "country's" business from Texas. Might as well move the White House there. Meanwhile, even if there is TONS of extra oil, if it's concentrated in a few places, the logic of imperialism and capitalism is that you go get it. I'll quote the report in the ASPO newsletter: <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Of course, in a Darwinian world, a militarily powerful nation might try to take oil by force anywhere on the planet. World War Two provided recent examples: oil supply being critical to Germany and Japan.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>It's actually a little weird that everything you accuse me of believing is explicitly stated as a part of this plan put forward in the ASPO newsletter. Maybe you just didn't read it.<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Who benefits from suppressing recognition of the oil production peak?<br><br>Our rulers, thats who. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Suppressed? Really? Here are quotes from just a few establishment figures that show that Peak Oil is not "suppressed" at all.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>RECENT PEAK OIL QUOTES<br><br>Circumstances seem to me as dangerous and intractable as any I can remember. .... What really concerns me is that there seems to be so little willingness or capacity to do anything about it.<br>Paul Volcker, Former US Federal Reserve Board Chairman<br>April 16, 2005<br><br>To me, a hope is that we are going to hit Peak Oil when oil resources begin to decline. ... and some geologists say we already hit it last year. The business community is now starting to take this very seriously. The impact of fossil fuel depletion is going to create enormous suffering, no doubt about it.<br>David Suzuki, April 23, 2005<br><br>So its very probable that the world is peaking in oil about now. .... The world in general, and the US in particular, has pretty much blown 25 years of time that we had, but no longer have, for preparation for the necessary transition.<br>Roscoe Bartlett, Maryland Republican Representative, May 4, 2005<br><br><br>Peak oil is starting to become conventional wisdom.<br>Edward Schreyer, Former Governor General of Canada, May 5, 2005<br><br>Peak oil is real and we are on the Peak now.<br>Al Gore, Former US Vice President, June 5, 2005<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Looks like lots of our "rulers" are letting the little secret slip out. Woops. Oh, and thanks for providing these quotes in the other thread. Saved me some time. (I deleted the Campbell quote only because I did not consider him one of our "rulers" and not due to its content.)<br><br>Meanwhile, if you want to play cui bono...then you can flip the whole thing on it's head. The rulers benefit by faking Peak Oil to:<br><br>a. Justify atrocious social policies in the name of population reduction or, at the very least, by arguing that peak oil suggests there's nothing they can do about it...a die off is inevitable. You do know, do you not wintler, that this idea of a die off is so pervasive among these resource depletion folks that there's a website called dieoff.com. Charming. The article, printed in the ASPO newsletter is quite clear on some of the policies Peak Oil, in their eyes, will justify.<br><br>b. Justify unrestrained exploitive pricing from the oil companies. As mentioned, lots of them hang out with da prez and, to be fair, they are certainly no less influential with the Dems.<br><br>c. Create a sense of hopelessness so that those who might otherwise be committed to social action to make the world a better place and who might, therefore, act in ways that challenge the power structure.<br><br>d. Justify further military intervention in oil rich regions. Come on, we are all against war, but if the alternative is some economic meltdown, well, we gotta do what we gotta do. And Stanton's article makes this point quite explicitly.<br><br>e. It gets the "rulers" off the hook. Hey, it's not OUR fault...the oil just ran out. <br><br> In sum, Peak oil can be used to justify all of the things you are so sure I'm the one advocating. However, I've never advocated these things, while this article printed in ASPO's very own newsletter does so quite clearly. Why you let them off the hook, I don't know.<br><br><br><br><br>My point in starting this thread is that this article is direct evidence that people who are central to the Peak Oil ideology (for such is what it has become) are part of a long tradition of using the idea of "resource depletion" as a peg to hang their eugenic hats on. Been around since Malthus...only they switched resources to oil from food. <br><br>And please do not confuse shortages due to the inherent inequalities in a globe dominated by ruthless capitalism and engineered shortages of various resources with ACTUAL shortages. The capitalists are in charge and they are ruthless. You justifiably point to the starving masses around the world. Is this because of "Peak Food"? <br><br><br>Saw your second post as I wrote this.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>wintler said:<br><br>"Nazi style eugenics"<br>The nazis and eugenics in general involved theories of racial fitness, but nowhere does Stanton suggest or imply any racial basis for population reduction. If we're at the schoolyard think-up-a-name level, can i say "takes one to know one"?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Here's the ASPO article:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Initially the greatest threats to UK security would come from rogue nations unwilling to curb traditionally high birth rates but lacking the means to feed the ever-growing numbers of new mouths. In the past, these were the poverty-stricken nations that repeatedly received humanitarian aid and famine relief, which did nothing to reduce the birth rate. In a Darwinian world, Nature would take its course. In consequence, their populations would reduce particularly fast and their threat would fade away.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>You, who called us the "White West" see no racial content in this paragraph? Seemed obvious to me. In any event, I propose that eugenics is all about "weeding out the bad stock." Doesn't have to be by race, though it sure looks to me like that's what they had in mind. Hitler, of course, didn't just weed out by race, as surely you just momentarily forgot. He went by religion, sexual orientation, mental and physical handicaps and political ideology. <br><br>Finallly, this:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"Though ASPO puts no official endorsement stamp on this, it is clear they consider this a valid option."<br>-How is this clear? Because 1 article in 1 newsletter canvas' such a plan, all of ASPO support it? On that logic presumably Rupert Murdoch supports Chavez, cos theres an interview with him in The Australian. And MSNBC supports a 911 enquiry cos they once did a news clip on a demo at ground zero. Uh huh, s-u-r-e..<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The obvious difference is that ASPO newsletters are exlusively about Peak Oil and what to do about it. And their intro, "hope it doesn't come to this" but it has a "chilling logic" is far from condemnatory. <br><br>Hey and in one of those weird coincidences, the original link is not working. The main ASPO site does not offer Pdf's of the newsletter, but the Ireland ASPO did so. Unfortunately the entire ASPO Ireland site is down. Maybe even they realized this article was not wise to have floating around. If it's just server maintenance, I plan to go back and peruse the newsletters more closely. However, I don't see ASPO newsletters as freewheeling discussion and debate...they are simply putting forward the case as they see it, through their own writing and the articles they choose to reprint. <br><br>As for Murdoch...yes, unlike you, I assume if something gets on FOX news, there is a reason and it somehow supports their ideology. Sorry if that comes as a shock to you.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>(incidentally i'm not an ASPO member, have no plans to become one).<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Great...it's nice to be able to end on a note of agreement.<br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dreamsend@rigorousintuition>Dreams End</A> at: 9/20/05 12:41 am<br></i>