The most important issue that the world faces right now in global warming. We are beginning to see the effects of it in extreme weather world wide. It is very depressing to see the politicians be bought by and owned by the fossil fuel companies. This week Rachel Maddow covered how Oklahoma passed a law placing a fine or fee on anyone who uses solar or wind energy.  This bill was written a lobbied for by Koch industries owners through their political efforts. It seems to defy reality that is all around us, that we need to reduce are carbon foot print.  

Chris Hayes has published an essay recently in the Nation that has an interesting look at why the fossil fuel industry has gone to war to prevent any restraints on their industry and protect the high dependency on fossil fuel.  He compares it to the value of slaves owned in the old south to the value of the resources that are owned by fossil fuel companies. We are going to have to ask the companies to give up trillions of dollars of future wealth and leave 80% of it in the ground. Like the south they will not give that up with out a big fight.

The comparison starts with a walk through the history of slavery.  

Before fossil fuels, the only way out of this drudgery was by getting other human beings to do the bulk of the work that the solar regime required of its participants. This could be done by using accrued money to pay for labor, but more often than not—particularly in societies like the Roman Empire that achieved density and scale—it was achieved through slavery

The north had become industrialized and the south was still clinging to a system that was becoming less efficient.  The plantation owners were that wealthiest people at that time in the country and their wealth was measured by their ownership in slaves. There was a growing movement that slavery was morally wrong. The planters were determined to continue because they had a surge in wealth the decades leading up to the war and now slaves values had tripled.  

In fact, the parallel I want to highlight is between the opponents of slavery and the opponents of fossil fuels. Because the abolitionists were ultimately successful, it’s all too easy to lose sight of just how radical their demand was at the time: that some of the wealthiest people in the country would have to give up their wealth. That liquidation of private wealth is the only precedent for what today’s climate justice movement is rightly demanding: that trillions of dollars of fossil fuel stay in the ground. It is an audacious demand, and those making it should be clear-eyed about just what they’re asking. They should also recognize that, like the abolitionists of yore, their task may be as much instigation and disruption as it is persuasion. There is no way around conflict with this much money on the line, no available solution that makes everyone happy. No use trying to persuade people otherwise.

He sums up that things are not doomed for us today in our efforts to reduce the use of fossil fuel, because slavery did not need a large out lay of capital to continue their production.  You only had to feed, cloth and shelter them after the first investment. This is not so in the production of fossil fuel.  You need a large continual investment of capital to extract and refine it. 

This means that fossil fuel companies are taking their investors’ money and spending it on this extremely expensive suicide mission. Every single day. If investors say, “Stop it—we want that money back as dividends rather than being spent on exploration,” then, according to this industry insider, “what that means is, literally, the oil and gas companies don’t have a viable business model. If all your investors say that, and all the analysts start saying that, they can no longer grow as businesses.”

This is happening now with the protests on the building of the Keystone Pipeline. Without the pipeline the tar sands become to expensive to produce oil because of the cost of shipping.  Protesters have convinced investor funds to divest themselves of these type of investments by showing up at stock meetings and sit-ins at Universities.  

Yesterday there was a reported leak from the White House that the President is not going to approve the Keystone Pipeline.  Let's hope that is true.  We have to move forward with renewable energy as quickly as possible.  I don't think he will announce that until after November and they are just sending up balloons on this.  

I recommend that you read the full essay The New Abolitionism, because it is very well written as well as interesting with his historical comparisons. It will give you plenty to think about as to why the last four decades the Koch family has been so involved directly in politics.

http://www.thenation.com/article/179461/new-abolitionism#