January 20, 2007

OBLIGATORY FASCIST REFERENCE:

Behold the Rise of Energy-Based Fascism (Michael T. Klare, 1/20/07, Tomdispatch.com)

[T]he world actually faces a far more substantial and universal threat, which might be dubbed: Energo-fascism, or the militarization of the global struggle over ever-diminishing supplies of energy.

Unlike Islamo-fascism, Energo-fascism will, in time, affect nearly every person on the planet. Either we will be compelled to participate in or finance foreign wars to secure vital supplies of energy, such as the current conflict in Iraq; or we will be at the mercy of those who control the energy spigot, like the customers of the Russian energy juggernaut Gazprom in Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia; or sooner or later we may find ourselves under constant state surveillance, lest we consume more than our allotted share of fuel or engage in illicit energy transactions. This is not simply some future dystopian nightmare, but a potentially all-encompassing reality whose basic features, largely unnoticed, are developing today.


It's amazing how little you grasp you have to have of economics in order to be a liberal. Particularly amusing here is not just that we'd still be using gasoline years ad infinitum after shortages became that acute but that the government, rather than the price itself, would stop you from consuming mass quantities.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 20, 2007 8:45 AM
Comments

We suppose that to a professor of "peace studies" labling defensive war as "fascism" makes perfect sense. That is what the author of the article does, again and again.

The hypothetical scenario is presented repeatedly: some sort of terrorist threat impacts oil supplies, and the world government, i.e., the United States, defends itself, and this is "fascism."

This alertstus to how the "peace professor" is abusing his language. Note how this conforms to the traditional Commie use of the word "fascism."

Posted by: Lou Gots at January 22, 2007 7:58 PM

We suppose that to a professor of "peace studies" labling defensive war as "fascism" makes perfect sense. That is what the author of the article does, again and again.

The hypothetical scenario is presented repeatedly: some sort of terrorist threat impacts oil supplies, and the world government, i.e., the United States, defends itself, and this is "fascism."

This alertstus to how the "peace professor" is abusing his language. Note how this conforms to the traditional Commie use of the word "fascism."

Posted by: Lou Gots at January 22, 2007 7:58 PM
« TWO DAYS BEFORE KICK-OFF AND THE PATS ARE ALREADY INSIDE THEIR HEADS: | Main | WHY JOURNALISTS DON'T RUN CAMPAIGNS: »