Oil And Silence
By Peter Goodchild
16 November, 2007
fact that the world’s oil supply is going to run out has been
known for a long time: M. King Hubbert was spreading the word in the
1950s, and there are persistent rumors that many oil engineers in those
days had a good idea of what was going on, but they were afraid to speak
because they might risk losing their jobs. But that was fifty years
ago. Why is there still such a remarkable silence?
How is it that only about
one in ten million people is concerned about the world’s decline
in oil? Pathological denial might account for a few cases, but surely
not for all. A state of denial could be found in people in the days
leading up to the Second World War, but those who were convinced of
the onset of war surely numbered more than one out of ten million.
The answer, in part, may
be that the issue is too complicated for people to understand. Whenever
there are articles written on the subject, they receive various comments
from readers, showing that each of those people is lacking in a knowledge
of one or more aspects of the problem. There are too many side-issues
for people to grasp. They cannot grasp how large or small the oil reserves
are, they cannot grasp the number of uses there are for oil, or how
dependent our entire industrial society is on it, they cannot grasp
the general foolishness of "alternative energy," and they
cannot grasp the fact that the "authorities" don’t have
some Grand Plan to deal with it all.
Another reason for the low
number of concerned people may be that there are so many other people
trying to push the opposite belief: that there is no problem of oil
depletion. Many such "peak-oil debunkers" are perhaps simply
afraid of the facts, and they may feel that they need to shelter themselves
by sharing their beliefs with others. The rest of such people are politicians
and business leaders who know — consciously or otherwise —
that they would have nothing to gain by rocking the boat, and that in
fact they might well risk their own jobs if they gained a reputation
for spreading doom and gloom.
Some people in positions
of authority may have an even better grasp of the consequences: they
may have realized that a public announcement of the end of oil could
lead to a general panic, a collapse of the stock market and money market,
a complete lack of faith in the hypercapitalist dream-world, where ordinary
citizens are duped into working for less and less, and at the same time
encouraged to spend more and more. The entire illusion could be shattered
if anyone in power were willing to speak a word of truth.
It is also true, no doubt,
that humans have great intelligence but a poor grasp of time. Most young
people cannot think ahead more than about a year, whatever issue may
be involved. Middle-aged people think ahead about as far as retirement.
Older people can only think ahead about as far as their own deaths.
Elderly people often say they have great love for their grandchildren,
yet when told about the oil problem they are likely to reply, "Oh,
well, what do I care? I’ll be dead by then"; that’s
not hypocrisy, it’s just a poor understanding of the fact that
the world can change significantly over time.
help, of course. To the slight extent that anyone is willing to discuss
world events, the opening line is likely to be, "Did you see X
on TV last night?" rather than, "Have you ever read X?"
Television, movies, and glossy magazines present a kaleidoscope of half-truths,
fragments that are strong on shape and color, weak on intellectual content
or interconnection. Dinner-party conversation must likewise consist
of paratactic bits and pieces if it is not to elicit an embarrassed
smile. We live in an age in which it is heresy to suggest that schoolchildren
be subjected to either placement or achievement tests, and the politically-respectable
definition of "average" sinks ever lower. The publishing of
a book with spelling errors in the 1950s would have been scandalous,
whereas books published nowadays seem to have been proofread by drunkards.
It may not be entirely true that bad spelling is the end of civilization
as we know it, but it is not entirely false either. No one is individually
to blame for illiteracy, but it is a growing trend that only rarely
arouses indignation, and the decision to resist being dazzled by "the
media" often means choosing to stand alone. Fundamentally, illiteracy
is a kind of mental cannibalism: such food is nutritious, but only for
as long as the supply holds out.
Perhaps the silence will
never end. Most people will never personally see the oil wells running
dry, so they will never really know who or what to blame. Modern surveillance
techniques will ensure that no protester gets more than half a mile
down a street. The process of erosion will be so slow at first that
people will wonder if they are imagining the whole thing: higher costs
for food and fuel, lower quality of goods and services, a general third-world
ambience to what were supposed to be first-world cities. One day, however,
there will be a realization that the Grand Plan is not forthcoming,
and that staying alive will depend on the Small Plan, person by person,
family by family.
is the author of Survival Skills of the North American Indians, published
by Chicago Review Press. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Share Your Insights
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.