What are they up to?
I first heard about the plan in 2008. The people who told me of it claimed to have known since 1996. I first realized the need for a plan in 2004.
How did this come about for me?
In 2004, I realized that not only was the oil supply limited, but that the limit was far closer than the end of oil. The limit was the mid point, the peak, as they say. Once half the oil is taken out, extraction will begin to decline. This has already proven true for individual fields and regions, and will prove true for the planet as a whole.
There is only X amount of oil in the ground. While I will concede that we do not know what X is, we can look for indicators of where we are within the rise and fall of the age of oil. For example, we know we hit the light, sweet crude peak between 2004 and 2006. That is, half the light, sweet crude, the easy to find, extract and refine oil, had been used. Forever more, the amount we can get out of the ground each year has declined. Already at the time that I began looking into the issue, they were making up the shortfall with natural gas liquids and tar sands. Since then, they have ramped up extraction and use of those sources and added the shale oil, heavy crude, the oil they get from hydraulic fracturing, aka fracking, and other sources. All of this is much more difficult to extract and complex and energy intensive to refine. We are only using the difficult to use oil because there is no longer enough of the easy to use stuff.
How much total oil remains? How close are we to the peak? Have we gone over it? Well informed, conservative estimates of the situation suggest that the total peak could have been as early as 2016, possibly as late as 2018. More liberal, optimistic estimates point towards the middle of this decade, possibly 2024 as the moment that we will hit that peak and the amount of oil we can extract will decline every year after that until we no longer use any at all. Whatever the exact date, we can see all around us the proof that supply and demand are tight.
If we consider this from a purely material perspective, we realize we have a major challenge on our hands. Our primary source of transportation energy is limited, and is becoming more severely limited each year. We can see the results of that in terms of oil and gas prices, as well as all the other rising prices we are witnessing here in early 2022. All those goods and services include the price of transportation and other hydrocarbon use in the retail prices we pay. While there are other forces also at play, the tightening oil and gasoline supply are major ones that are beyond the scope of human control.
Many people will point to restrictions put in place by the current president as the cause of the current price increases. Again, they do have some effect, but we have to remember, while phase IV of the Keystone pipeline would have made shipping the oil more convenient, all that oil from the Canadian tar sands and the Bakken shale fields is still being extracted and used. The rest of the pipeline is in use. The oil that has been declared off limits by the current president may take the edge off the current price increases, but not by much. What is more, it will not change the overall shape of the rise and fall by any appreciable amount. People making fifty to hundred year plans recognize that not much can be done to change the shape of that rise and fall beyond a little political tinkering. I cannot address all the lies being told about the oil supply by early investors who are hoping to dump their investment on the unsuspecting. If you believe the U.S. has hundreds of years worth of oil, all I can say is, caveat emptor. You have learned nothing about how the media manipulates people at the behest of their wealthy owners.
If we consider the issue of the oil supply from the financial perspective, we see a more complex picture. To make the simple, material shift to replace oil and gas with other forms of energy is not technologically complex. We have other sources of energy and the technology to harvest them. There are some hurdles, but the engineers are creative, and are constantly addressing them, and improving and expanding the possibilities.
What is far more problematic is the social order and the social institutions that have arisen during the age of oil. I do not want to say they were exactly designed for the age of oil, but in a way they have been. At the least, they have grown up alongside of and intertwined with oil. It is easy to criticize them for their many faults from a humane standpoint. However we feel about the morality of such a social order, it is how we have organized our society for centuries. Now, that which sustained that social order is disappearing at an increasing rate. We can imagine two lines on a graph, our social order and the oil that fuels it. From 1859 to 2006, they rose alongside each other. From 2006 until now, they have begun to diverge. As the line representing the social order continues to climb, the line representing the oil supply has flattened out. Any day now, it will begin to descend. It may already have.
What is that social order? Obviously, it is very complex. In an attempt to bring its shape into greater relief, I will outline a major structure of it here, one that I feel plays a central role in what is happening in the world now, finance.
Our current worldwide financial system can be traced to the early seventeenth century. The first modern bank was the Bank of Amsterdam. As overseas exploration was increasing, merchants and investors had to figure out how to generate the fluidity necessary to finance European colonization of the rest of the world, the creation of the modern Euro American empire. Based on older banking principles established over the previous five thousand year history of money, chartered by banks whose history goes back at least to the early renaissance, and whose origins are lost in the mists of time to all who do not have access to their ancient vaults, the Bank of Amsterdam laid the groundwork for European expansion, and we can see all around us just how successful that system has been.
The issue we are facing now is, that system requires continual growth in total assets. It was designed very intentionally for that purpose. While any one individual can live on cash, or at least positive deposits in their account, the system as a whole requires continual borrowing, and that borrowing has to be against an asset. That is, there has to be some kind of tangible wealth offered to the bank in order for the bank to generate the money, and that money has to be paid back with interest. This means that each year more assets have to be added so that within the system as a whole, there is sufficient new money to service the existing debts and lubricate the economy. In this system, there will always be more total debt than money and that gap will always grow.
Originally put in place to facilitate colonization and empire building, the system got a huge, unexpected boost. The age of oil, officially kicking off in 1859 in Pennsylvania, provided a previously unimaginable source of new assets, namely, the energy itself as well as all that could be done with that energy. That vast wealth of energy allowed for an exploding population which in turn became another asset.
By 1950, it was clear to anybody in those echelons that the oil supply was limited. King Abdullah ibn Saud, the founder of Saudi Arabia, was well aware of its limitations when he said, “I rode a camel. My children fly in jets. Their children will fly in jets. Their children will ride camels.” His grandchildren are old and their children are now taking over the country.
While no public, official noise has been made by the people in such echelons, we can assume that they did not just turn a blind eye to the threats to their wealth and hegemony. Without any specific knowledge of the conversations they've had, we can imagine they had some, and it seems likely they came up with some kind of plan to address the situation. If lumber corporations plant forests they know they will not harvest for sixty years, we can imagine that other types of corporations also make long term plans.
What are those plans? Again, I have no special insider knowledge. For reasons I cannot fathom, I have not been invited to those meetings. So, I am left to observe the actions of the people who do the planning to see how they implement their plans. I am also left to hypothesize. If I were invited to such meetings, what would be suggested? What would we discuss?
One of my favorite examples of such a meeting and the plans that came out of it are the meetings the new vice president, Dick Cheney, held in the white house shortly after taking office in the winter of 2001. In the mid 90s, Haliburton, a company he has had close ties with, had been in Afghanistan negotiating a pipeline route to bring gas through the region to the Indian Ocean to be shipped around the world to refineries. When the Taliban took control of the country, they brought those negotiations to a close and kicked the corporations out of the country. In response, Cheney and others who were later central figures in the Bush administration founded the Project for a New American Century in 1996. At the time, their website openly called for a false flag operation that would drum up public support for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. After Cheney was elected vice president, he invited the chiefs of all the major oil corporations to closed door, secret meetings in the white house. We could see who went in and who came out. We can see what happened afterwards. But we can only hypothesize what was actually discussed and decided upon in the room itself.
Again, regardless of those particular meetings, we have to assume that people running multi billion dollar corporations in multi trillion dollar industries know what we know about their own industries, and plan accordingly.
What are those plans? What are the banking corporations planning on using as new assets as the oil dries up? What are they planning on using for energy?
In university in the early 1990s, I studied genetics. When I was studying finance and commercial law in 2008, I put two and two together. It was not difficult. It equals four. It was obvious. The next frontier for colonization was the genome, life itself. Space is on the table, but the ability to colonize space is too far away. In the meantime, they needed something more accessible. There are a lot of smaller asset classes, but what is the next global colonization, the next age of oil? What is the next great asset class that will keep the system alive for generations, even centuries?
As the CEO of Bayer said in a public talk recently, covid gave them the opportunity they needed. If they'd asked people before covid if they wanted to have engineered, patented, corporate owned genes injected into them, ninety five percent of the people would have been horrified. Now, they line up and consider themselves heroes, and want to exile those who do not participate.
Again, I was not privy to any of the private planning meetings, but we can see what has been done and see how it aligns with what makes sense from the perspective of the purely mechanical needs of the system. And we can read the documents and listen to the speeches of the people involved.
For the financial system as we know it to survive, they need the genes. They cannot take ownership of naturally occurring genes, so they have to replace them with engineered, patented genes owned by the corporations. This is why it is important to inject these genes into people on a massive scale. What we've seen with covid is just the beginning. It is the first step, the first broad public experiment.
From a protester or health freedom advocate's perspective it can seem like we are winning as the truth comes out and people are responding according to their natures. From a broader perspective, we have to realize, they cannot stop. If they do, the financial system collapses. It is not just a question of whether or not the people in positions of apparent authority want to stop or not. To stop or continue is an existential question for the entire financial system, and the entire society that it forms the spiritual framework for and through which we organize our material sustenance (see my essay on how the financial system is the spiritual framework of modern society).
The more the pressure on the system grows and the more untenable and inhumane it becomes, the more the humane people will be pushed out and replaced by the inhumane people who can do the unimaginable. Already we are seeing this pattern in effect, and it will only intensify as time goes on and the pressure and inhumanity increase. Already we can see how what they are doing, trying to replace our naturally occurring genome with their patented one and trying to force us all to comply through the use of horrific, traumatic measures that have brutalized a generation of children and done countless more damage is evil beyond what most humans can fathom. Already, so many people have gone along with it, either vociferously and vigorously supporting and implementing the horror, or at least quietly going along with it so as to not cause problems for themselves.
How much worse will it get before it collapses altogether? How much inhumanity can humanity bear?
Is there another way?