Primary Colours  

I don't agree George Bush was the worst President this century. He's criticized for ignoring enviromental concerns, making him a disaster as President, in the eyes of his critics. I don't agree with that perspective at all. I'm not saying he was a great President, or even good President, but, in the real world, things happen and change comes in indirect ways.

For example, since Bush invaded Iraq, the price of oil has obviously shot up, tremendously. Now, as most people on this site know, that's mainly due to supply shortages, and excessive demand, that can't be accomadated, in the long term.

Since the invasion, there has been an extra $500 billion a year, flowing from advanced industrial economies, into the middle east. This amounts to the largest and quickest transfer of wealth, in human history.

Now, one of the big things that motivates people is money. That kind of money gets people's attention. Even though the Bush administration has a stupid energy policy, and doesn't do much sensible action, to try to lead America on a better energy path, the very fact that Iraq is such a big disaster could turn out to be Bush's best accomplishment, even if he didn't mean it that way.

I think it is because of Bush's failure and incompetance, accompanying the high cost of oil, and the high cost of the war, that the enviromental movement has been given it's biggest boost, ever.

Think about it. In spite of the Bush administration, there is more research into alternative energy sources, than ever before. I think it is because President Bush's incompetance has made, what is now, the start of the Peak Oil Crisis, much worse. Which, in the long run, is a good thing, because in fighting off or adapting to any disaster, I think it is important for change to be generated near the start of the disaster. Bush's incompetence has certainly lit a fire under many people.

Many things have become clear, to thinking people, because of the Iraq War. First, there is the cost of the war, approaching 1 trillion dollars. This gets people's attention. America is not in Iraq for the figs. "The Iraq War is largely about Oil". Sound familiar? That's Allen Greenspan, talking. As a result, people are thinking about these issues more.

Even Bush said, "America is addicted to oil" Remember that? It was in his State of the Union address a couple years ago. The point is, Bush went into Iraq to control oil supply, so that future generations of you gas guzzling Yanks can keep up your extravagent lifestyle.

Don't like it? Well, get off oil. What Bush has done here, for thinking people, is clarified several things: It got people thinking about oil. How much it costs. How much we have. What we use it for. What it's doing to our enviroment. How much it affects geo-politics, and can lead us into very expensive wars, to give Americans the oil they need to keep their expensive lifestyles going. This all gets people thinking. And that's good. And you know what?

It takes a lot to get people thinking. Here's an historical example of the massive amount of lack of foresight, intelligent people can display, even when presented with warnings. In the 1930s, Adolf Hitler wrote his sick book, Mein Kampf, in prison, where he said things like, I want to exterminate all the Jews, I want to enslave all east Europeans, like Poles and Russians, because they are inferior, I want to take control of Germany and create a master race. Now, Germany at the time had about six million Jews. Culturally, German Jews were very learned, and read a lot. And yet, no one believed this evil little Nazi. No one paid much attention to him, really. Which, in hindsight, seems kind of strange, considering 50 million people died in the Second World War, and Hitler laid out exactly what he intended to do, in his book. He wrote it down, so it wasn't like the world wasn't told. Doesn't that all seem strange, in hindsight, that even though many people must have known, no one took him seriously, or forsaw the disaster that was WWII.

But, maybe, it's not so strange. Maybe that's just the way most people are, sometimes, or even most of the time. Maybe most ordinary people, and also leaders, are so narrow minded and self focused, on what they perceive to be reality, that it takes a hell of a lot to get their attention. Maybe most human beings are genetically wired only to worry about their own little world, and they don't give serious thought to abstract threats. Maybe very people have the type of personality that allows them to make leaps of imagination of that magnitude.

It's my belief, at this critical juncture in history, to solve some of our problems, a massive amount of shock or pain will be necessary, to motivate people. I think George Bush, through his incompetence, and starting a war with Iraq, was just that shock, that pain, that the world needed, to goad it to action. God bless his incompetence!

People need screw ups, like George Bush, for a reason, having to do with human nature:

I happen to think, like most people on this site, that the world is in deep deep do-do, and a lot needs to be done, to stave off massive enviromental disaster.

But I also would guess, the reason I think this way, is that I happen to have a peculiar hobby, studying energy sources and the green enviromental movement. This movement, thankfully, is really growing, but the reality is, most people, even leaders, are not in our little universe, people. They have other problems, other interests, other concerns, and don't spend a lot of time thinking about energy problems. So, it turns out, only a small portion of mankind has the time and inclination to be seriously informed about these problems.

This leads me back to Bush. Yes, he was a disaster, but that's good, if we want it to be. Whether the Bush presidency turns out to be useful for America depends on how his critics react to his failures. Will they be just as incompetant and visionless as Bush? We shall see.

One thing I give him credit for, though. His lackluster leadership has brought the energy problems to the forefront. People see now that energy is a huge and costly issue, and a lot more serious people are giving it serious thought, thanks to the disaster of the Bush presidency.

My personal belief about people is that it usually takes a hell of a lot to get people's attention, in terms of things that lead them to change their little world. Well, $100 a barrel oil was supplied by the reality of Peak Oil, and George Bush threw in a trillion dollar war, and all that all gets people's attention.

Maybe, just maybe, all this is enough to get the political leaders in America to change course. We'll see.

Which leads me to the Democrats. You know what? The current political situation is a big opening for the Democrats, if they are smart enough to see that, have a vision, and seize the opportunity. Now is the time for them to lay out a clear and honest vision, for Americans, about their economy, and the relationship to oil, with all it's ramifications having to do with the enviroment, and the future, if they have a vision. Will they do it? Do they have any idea what they are doing? We'll see.

The recent past, of the Democrats, is not hopeful. In my opinion, the Democrats have been just as incompetent as Bush, on these matters. That's part of the reason someone as incompetent as Bush could beat them, in two straight elections. To any Democrat, I would ask: Your team was beat twice in a row by someone we both agree was incompetent. What does that say about the competancy of your team?

The truth, as far as I've seen it, is that the Democrats don't have any kind of coherent vision, about energy policy, war and peace, and how it relates to what we are doing to this planet, and how we can change that. They have not laid out a grand vision, of a set of energy goals, and how America will change it's economy, to make it more sustainable. Al Gore, who I admire, was long on the Mr. Gloom and Doom, and very very short on practical ways that showed America was to solve it's energy and enviromental problems, and very short on vague optimism, like Americans got from Reagan, and could get from Obama. This current crop of Democrats, does need to be more specific, on energy policy. All we get so far, from them, are vague, rambling generalities, like talk about "hope" in America, from Obama. Well, hope is nice, but I'd like a plan, too.

As the old lady in the Burger King ad, from 20 years ago said, "Where's the beef?"

Wow - thats quite a comment.

Normally when people write that much they are totally incoherent but you made sense - thank you.

Overall I agree with your sentiments about Bush - he did get people's attention (he certainly woke me up).

As for the mainstream Democrats, I'm not too excited about them - they mostly look like business as usual, but with less baring of fangs and pompous rhetoric than we got from the neocons.

Kucinich is OK on the energy front - too interventionist for my linking in general, but he wants to shift our energy usage in the right direction at least.