In principle, there’s not much to argue with in this article and it certainly contains a grain of hope that common sense might return to American politics. But here’s the sticking point for me:
“there is growing concern among Democrats that the party’s energy positions are untenable for the working and middle class. It’s not inconceivable that the Democrats, and the coastal enclaves, are forced into action by the reality of soaring food, car and energy prices.”
Is there really such growing concern among Democrats? I’m not convinced. Look at the author’s home state of California which is dominated by the Democrats. Mr. Kotkin has written about California’s dysfunction extensively, and no matter how bad that state becomes, with people predicting some sort of popular revolt against bad government, nothing changes and things actually get worse.
My guess is the only thing that will change our Democrat-directed collapse is what amounts to a social revolution. It probably won’t be called a revolution and it might not all happen at once in a dramatic fashion, but gradually America will split in two with the more conservative states simply ignoring the dictates of DC and going their own way. Of course the coastal states will push back and try to force the heartland to obey their diktats by legal means, but the time will come when the only way to do that will be to send in the military or militarized wings of organizations such as the FBI and that’s probably where the line will be drawn because of the likely consequences of such actions.
I hope I’m wrong. I’m increasingly pessimistic about the future of America, but I keep asking for proof or signs that things are getting better, and all I receive in return are vague statements about how eventually common sense will prevail. That’s either inspired prophecy or wishful thinking.
Actually, your scenario of federal authorities drawing the line at militarised intervention may be a positive. Remember, America was conceived as a group of mini-countries which would only come together in limited, stated circumstances. Federal overreach, even for good ends, has always been a problem, and the left’s propensity for using it to stuff things people don’t want down their throats is a serious danger to the county’s continued unity. If America IS returning to its constitutional basis, that’s no bad thing.
Good point, except that that level of division of the US would, in short term, simply hand over world dominance to China. Russia, as China’s junior partner, would get what it wants in Eastern (only?) Europe. As their appetite of the authoritarian powers is whetted without resistance, of course it is likely to grow. That would be a geostrategic disaster for freedom.
China imports 80% of its energy, primarily from the Persian Gulf, it all flows through the Straits of Malacca, a couple of destroyers can shut it down in a week. The lights will go out all over in China in 3 weeks. In six months they will be in famine. Thus the reason for the belt and road and the scramble to build pipelines to the Gulf and Russia.
I’ve read a few articles about businesses relocating to red states. Is that a real thing or wishful thinking by conservative commentators?
If it is a real thing, would it eventually affect the power balance between states? I really don’t know enough about US political structures but would assume greater economic clout alters the power dynamics?
Polarisation in the US is now a common media trope. Is it a real thing “on the street?” I find here in the U.K., the bulk of the population still seems unaware or unconcerned by the kinds of issues we all get very exercised about on Unherd.
Yes it is real. Which is precisely why the MSM seeks out ways to disparage Florida and Texas. Elon Musk moving to TX is a perfect example of relocating businesses, but the real threat is the people who leave places like CA and NY and move to FL and TX. The recipient red states get more congressional seats as a result as the big blue states lose seats. That’s where the rubber meets the road and why the MSM is apoplectic about it.
Yeah agreed – good comment
I think this is why we have seen a surge in popularity of more moderate Republicans (DeSantis, and Rand Paul etc).
By luck or design they are occupying a massive void in the middle for voters who might not quite buy Trump and his eccentricities, but see the Dems for the chaos and incompetence they eradiate.
Exactly. The entire article hinges on “it’s not inconceivable that” the Democrats might pull their collective head out of their collective backside, see reason and go back to (presumably) the glory years of Clintonite/West Wing competence and gosh-darn decency. (Republicans of course are just irredeemable baddies in this framing). It’s not inconceivable, but it hardly seems likely either.
Until true Americans hunt liberals and democrats to extinction, America remains at risk.
Douglas Proudfoot
2 years ago
Am I the only one to notice that the Russia Hoax, 4 years of fake Russian connections to Trump fabricated by the Clinton Campaign and sold to corrupt FBI, DOJ and CIA, basically projected weakness and disorganization to Putin? Consider that Putin was in a unique position to know that the whole thing was a hoax from day one. Now think about how he would view the perpetrators of the Russia Hoax, who are currently in power.
Further, consider how much more cash Putin has with oil at $100 a barrel than he did at $45 a barrel. Trump was a drill baby drill president. Biden is a don’t even think about drilling president. Which do you think Putin prefers?
Then we get to the canard that the right, or at least elements of it, admire Putin. That’s objectively false. The right takes Putin seriously, more seriously than trans rights in the army, or the phantom menace of man-made global warming. The left won’t pump one barrel more of domestic oil, even if that means Putin can kill thousands of Ukrainians with the munitions he buys with his oil sales at inflated prices. The left will expell experienced soldiers who think a person with a d**k is still a man, even if he says he’s a woman. The left thinks wokeness is more important than military readiness. Putin obviously doesn’t. That’s the contrast the right is making. Putin is serious. Biden and the left are not. It has nothing to do with admiration. It just takes an enemy seriously.
Leftists who identify as journalists purposely misconstrue Trump’s, and the right’s, position on Putin so that they can claim nobody would have stopped Putin. That’s obviously false as well. Trump stopped Putin for 4 years. Obama and Biden both failed to stop Putin. Green New Deal policies enable Putin. All out energy production in North America, facilitated by pipelines to transport oil and natural gas to market, weaken Putin. It’s that simple.
Last edited 2 years ago by Douglas Proudfoot
Matt Hindman
2 years ago
There is talk that Saudi Arabia will allow China to purchase oil in their own currency instead of U.S. dollars. This could mark the beginning of the end of the petrodollar. Things could get a lot worse for America and China could become a lot more powerful. I have not heard a word about this from the talking heads in Washington or the mainstream media and it is potentially one of the most explosive economic and geopolitical events to happen in recent memory if the Saudis follow through.
Edit: Unherd now has an article on it. https://unherd.com/thepost/a-saudi-china-oil-deal-is-a-warning-shot-to-the-west/
What is the KSA going to do with Roubles? Answer: buy UDS and Euros.
George Brown
2 years ago
Excellent summation of our current follies and a reason to hope we will turn it around.
D Hockley
2 years ago
It is not a divided America that empowers the enemy; it is the WEAK leader. Sleepy Joe is no man to have as president of the USA ….Indeed, this hollow man is no man at all.
Last edited 2 years ago by D Hockley
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
2 years ago
“For more than a decade, Vladimir Putin has sought to sow division and undermine American democracy.”
I cannot really buy that.
Liberalism destroyed Europe it is doing the same to America, soon all that have powerful fighters willing to lead will come from China and Russia. The West is too interested in deviate sexual practices and drugs.
Paul K
2 years ago
Brilliant. An article about energy policy which doesn’t once mention the reality of climate change. This entire argument rests on the hopeful/desperate assumption that climate change is a hoax/not real/doesn’t matter/won’t be disastrous etc etc. This is common amongst people of all classes and political stripes because the alternative is to face up to the possibility that the entirety of industrial modernity is built on sand. Easier to ignore fifty years of science, keep burning the oil and hope for the best. After all, it’s only crazy green leftists who think this is a bad idea, right?
Ironic for an essay about short-sightedness.
“Easier to ignore fifty years of science” It is not anything remotely like science just as we learned with Covid. It is little better than a scam and some people are doing very nicely out of it.
I am just waiting (for 50years) for one forecast of climatic disaster to come true. If fact by all accounts, the world seems to be getting colder and the sea level rise is imperceptible. The yearly average temperature in North America appears to be slightly below the seasonal average.
“Since taking the White House, Biden has turned the Federal Reserve and other executive departments into enforcers of “net zero” policies. From the very beginning, Biden and his green allies have busily cancelled gas pipelines, ended new leases for offshore oil, and introduced new regulations that make it harder to build new fossil fuel plants.”
Good!
Global overheating is not an extinction level event for mankind, but it will be hugely damaging. If too little is done, it is, I think, unavoidable that there will be a huge migration crisis as both crops and water sources fail. The political, humanitarian and financial costs will be colossal. So I believe that moving away from all carbon fuels is a financial and moral necessity. My primary concern with ‘Net Zero’ is that it doesn’t go far enough – where possible we should be aiming at Net Negative.
So a return to subsistence levels of living? It might work for those living in rural areas, but not sure about those who live in densely populated cities.
I raised the question because the debate is still on in many circles as to whether humans can meaningfully influence warming. The debate is not ‘allowed’ to be ventilated, which is ludicrous.
Then there is the lunacy around countries going green and then buying dirty energy from other countries.
Finally, to what extent should people be wilfully ruining their economies in the light of the above and what will it cost in lives lost?
I guess the most important thing is to find the cause, if what you say is true. If the problem was really serious, then we should work with China and India to reduce their emissions.
It’s not a simple binary though is it? Which is the whole point here.
By mindlessly following green policies, Biden’s administration has damaged both America’s standing and their green credentials. Banning and prohibiting fossil fuels in an economy that still heavily relies on them is just plain stupid
It seems as if no concrete thought was given to this, or how that instead of providing cleaner more efficient fossil fuels to bridge the gap as we move away, the US is now still purchasing the same amount from less-regulated less-clean (from a green perspective) parts of the world.
Not only plain stupid in regards to energy, the Greens seem to blissfully ignore the huge dependence of Western economies on all the other “stuff” that petrochemicals provide (hint: plastics are just the tip of the iceberg). And many of them look upon nuclear power with the same distaste as fossil fuel power for generating electricity.
The electrons just don’t magically self-generate when one flips a light switch or plugs in their EV for a recharge. Biden’s undoing of US energy independence is a disaster, and I can only hope and pray that his party gets a hiding in the midterms.
In principle, there’s not much to argue with in this article and it certainly contains a grain of hope that common sense might return to American politics. But here’s the sticking point for me:
“there is growing concern among Democrats that the party’s energy positions are untenable for the working and middle class. It’s not inconceivable that the Democrats, and the coastal enclaves, are forced into action by the reality of soaring food, car and energy prices.”
Is there really such growing concern among Democrats? I’m not convinced. Look at the author’s home state of California which is dominated by the Democrats. Mr. Kotkin has written about California’s dysfunction extensively, and no matter how bad that state becomes, with people predicting some sort of popular revolt against bad government, nothing changes and things actually get worse.
My guess is the only thing that will change our Democrat-directed collapse is what amounts to a social revolution. It probably won’t be called a revolution and it might not all happen at once in a dramatic fashion, but gradually America will split in two with the more conservative states simply ignoring the dictates of DC and going their own way. Of course the coastal states will push back and try to force the heartland to obey their diktats by legal means, but the time will come when the only way to do that will be to send in the military or militarized wings of organizations such as the FBI and that’s probably where the line will be drawn because of the likely consequences of such actions.
I hope I’m wrong. I’m increasingly pessimistic about the future of America, but I keep asking for proof or signs that things are getting better, and all I receive in return are vague statements about how eventually common sense will prevail. That’s either inspired prophecy or wishful thinking.
Actually, your scenario of federal authorities drawing the line at militarised intervention may be a positive. Remember, America was conceived as a group of mini-countries which would only come together in limited, stated circumstances. Federal overreach, even for good ends, has always been a problem, and the left’s propensity for using it to stuff things people don’t want down their throats is a serious danger to the county’s continued unity. If America IS returning to its constitutional basis, that’s no bad thing.
Good point, except that that level of division of the US would, in short term, simply hand over world dominance to China. Russia, as China’s junior partner, would get what it wants in Eastern (only?) Europe. As their appetite of the authoritarian powers is whetted without resistance, of course it is likely to grow. That would be a geostrategic disaster for freedom.
And it is why Ronald Reagan said the U.S. is liberty’s last stand on earth.
China imports 80% of its energy, primarily from the Persian Gulf, it all flows through the Straits of Malacca, a couple of destroyers can shut it down in a week. The lights will go out all over in China in 3 weeks. In six months they will be in famine. Thus the reason for the belt and road and the scramble to build pipelines to the Gulf and Russia.
And yet conservatives are blamed for trying to undermine democracy! It’s quite the opposite in reality.
I’ve read a few articles about businesses relocating to red states. Is that a real thing or wishful thinking by conservative commentators?
If it is a real thing, would it eventually affect the power balance between states? I really don’t know enough about US political structures but would assume greater economic clout alters the power dynamics?
Polarisation in the US is now a common media trope. Is it a real thing “on the street?” I find here in the U.K., the bulk of the population still seems unaware or unconcerned by the kinds of issues we all get very exercised about on Unherd.
Yes it is real. Which is precisely why the MSM seeks out ways to disparage Florida and Texas. Elon Musk moving to TX is a perfect example of relocating businesses, but the real threat is the people who leave places like CA and NY and move to FL and TX. The recipient red states get more congressional seats as a result as the big blue states lose seats. That’s where the rubber meets the road and why the MSM is apoplectic about it.
Shut off water and power to all blue cities and watch them crumble into chaos.
Yeah agreed – good comment
I think this is why we have seen a surge in popularity of more moderate Republicans (DeSantis, and Rand Paul etc).
By luck or design they are occupying a massive void in the middle for voters who might not quite buy Trump and his eccentricities, but see the Dems for the chaos and incompetence they eradiate.
TRUMP exposed the rot and decay in American leadership, it is why liberals hate him so!
Exactly. The entire article hinges on “it’s not inconceivable that” the Democrats might pull their collective head out of their collective backside, see reason and go back to (presumably) the glory years of Clintonite/West Wing competence and gosh-darn decency. (Republicans of course are just irredeemable baddies in this framing). It’s not inconceivable, but it hardly seems likely either.
Using the words decency and Clinton in the same sentence is utterly offensive. 🙂
Until true Americans hunt liberals and democrats to extinction, America remains at risk.
Am I the only one to notice that the Russia Hoax, 4 years of fake Russian connections to Trump fabricated by the Clinton Campaign and sold to corrupt FBI, DOJ and CIA, basically projected weakness and disorganization to Putin? Consider that Putin was in a unique position to know that the whole thing was a hoax from day one. Now think about how he would view the perpetrators of the Russia Hoax, who are currently in power.
Further, consider how much more cash Putin has with oil at $100 a barrel than he did at $45 a barrel. Trump was a drill baby drill president. Biden is a don’t even think about drilling president. Which do you think Putin prefers?
Then we get to the canard that the right, or at least elements of it, admire Putin. That’s objectively false. The right takes Putin seriously, more seriously than trans rights in the army, or the phantom menace of man-made global warming. The left won’t pump one barrel more of domestic oil, even if that means Putin can kill thousands of Ukrainians with the munitions he buys with his oil sales at inflated prices. The left will expell experienced soldiers who think a person with a d**k is still a man, even if he says he’s a woman. The left thinks wokeness is more important than military readiness. Putin obviously doesn’t. That’s the contrast the right is making. Putin is serious. Biden and the left are not. It has nothing to do with admiration. It just takes an enemy seriously.
Leftists who identify as journalists purposely misconstrue Trump’s, and the right’s, position on Putin so that they can claim nobody would have stopped Putin. That’s obviously false as well. Trump stopped Putin for 4 years. Obama and Biden both failed to stop Putin. Green New Deal policies enable Putin. All out energy production in North America, facilitated by pipelines to transport oil and natural gas to market, weaken Putin. It’s that simple.
There is talk that Saudi Arabia will allow China to purchase oil in their own currency instead of U.S. dollars. This could mark the beginning of the end of the petrodollar. Things could get a lot worse for America and China could become a lot more powerful. I have not heard a word about this from the talking heads in Washington or the mainstream media and it is potentially one of the most explosive economic and geopolitical events to happen in recent memory if the Saudis follow through.
Edit: Unherd now has an article on it.
https://unherd.com/thepost/a-saudi-china-oil-deal-is-a-warning-shot-to-the-west/
It would be even worse if Putin, China and possibly Iran are acting in concert in an attempt to break US hegemony.
What is the KSA going to do with Roubles? Answer: buy UDS and Euros.
Excellent summation of our current follies and a reason to hope we will turn it around.
It is not a divided America that empowers the enemy; it is the WEAK leader. Sleepy Joe is no man to have as president of the USA ….Indeed, this hollow man is no man at all.
“For more than a decade, Vladimir Putin has sought to sow division and undermine American democracy.”
I cannot really buy that.
The enemy within. #10 on the list. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Basic_Principles_of_War_Propaganda
Liberalism destroyed Europe it is doing the same to America, soon all that have powerful fighters willing to lead will come from China and Russia. The West is too interested in deviate sexual practices and drugs.
Brilliant. An article about energy policy which doesn’t once mention the reality of climate change. This entire argument rests on the hopeful/desperate assumption that climate change is a hoax/not real/doesn’t matter/won’t be disastrous etc etc. This is common amongst people of all classes and political stripes because the alternative is to face up to the possibility that the entirety of industrial modernity is built on sand. Easier to ignore fifty years of science, keep burning the oil and hope for the best. After all, it’s only crazy green leftists who think this is a bad idea, right?
Ironic for an essay about short-sightedness.
Yes. Much better to drill it in Russia or Venezuela then ship it over.
“Easier to ignore fifty years of science”
It is not anything remotely like science just as we learned with Covid. It is little better than a scam and some people are doing very nicely out of it.
I am just waiting (for 50years) for one forecast of climatic disaster to come true. If fact by all accounts, the world seems to be getting colder and the sea level rise is imperceptible. The yearly average temperature in North America appears to be slightly below the seasonal average.
There is zero proof of AGW. Next.
“Since taking the White House, Biden has turned the Federal Reserve and other executive departments into enforcers of “net zero” policies. From the very beginning, Biden and his green allies have busily cancelled gas pipelines, ended new leases for offshore oil, and introduced new regulations that make it harder to build new fossil fuel plants.”
Good!
How so?
Global overheating is not an extinction level event for mankind, but it will be hugely damaging. If too little is done, it is, I think, unavoidable that there will be a huge migration crisis as both crops and water sources fail. The political, humanitarian and financial costs will be colossal. So I believe that moving away from all carbon fuels is a financial and moral necessity. My primary concern with ‘Net Zero’ is that it doesn’t go far enough – where possible we should be aiming at Net Negative.
So a return to subsistence levels of living? It might work for those living in rural areas, but not sure about those who live in densely populated cities.
I raised the question because the debate is still on in many circles as to whether humans can meaningfully influence warming. The debate is not ‘allowed’ to be ventilated, which is ludicrous.
Then there is the lunacy around countries going green and then buying dirty energy from other countries.
Finally, to what extent should people be wilfully ruining their economies in the light of the above and what will it cost in lives lost?
I guess the most important thing is to find the cause, if what you say is true. If the problem was really serious, then we should work with China and India to reduce their emissions.
It’s not a simple binary though is it? Which is the whole point here.
By mindlessly following green policies, Biden’s administration has damaged both America’s standing and their green credentials. Banning and prohibiting fossil fuels in an economy that still heavily relies on them is just plain stupid
It seems as if no concrete thought was given to this, or how that instead of providing cleaner more efficient fossil fuels to bridge the gap as we move away, the US is now still purchasing the same amount from less-regulated less-clean (from a green perspective) parts of the world.
Not only plain stupid in regards to energy, the Greens seem to blissfully ignore the huge dependence of Western economies on all the other “stuff” that petrochemicals provide (hint: plastics are just the tip of the iceberg). And many of them look upon nuclear power with the same distaste as fossil fuel power for generating electricity.
The electrons just don’t magically self-generate when one flips a light switch or plugs in their EV for a recharge. Biden’s undoing of US energy independence is a disaster, and I can only hope and pray that his party gets a hiding in the midterms.