an entirely written in the morning blogpost (excepting the following quote he wrote down in his diary last night).
'a piece of writing is a whole that proceeds as a whole - it never presents itself as a matter of choice...'
- marguerite duras, practicalities.
forever war (the stupidest war ever)
horsemouth has said he thinks the current gulf war is the stupidest war ever. unlike the war of jenkins ear it is not the pretext for this war that is stupid, it is the complete failure to think through the consequences.
horsemouth fails to see whose strategic interests it serves and for this reason he thinks it is the stupidest war ever.
the israelis have lunched their reliable ally status with the US. the US has lunched its reliable ally and hegemon status with the rest of the world by precipitating an oil (diesel) crisis without any clear way out. it is a forever war in which the enemy cannot be dislodged from their fortress and that fortress controls a vital strategic asset.
the full effects of the crisis have not appeared yet because the world is running on its reserves of diesel. when the reserves are gone the real crisis starts.
when the real crisis starts
production and distribution can happen because of energy - you need energy to get the workers to work and to run the factories, and diesel (in particular) to transport the finished goods to market. a major part of any saleable item in a globalised economy is the transport costs, if these rise (as they will) this will drive up inflation and thus interest rates and thus reduce investment into the economy and drive up unemployment as demand falls.
(horsemouth should really talk to his brother's eldest about this - it's his area of expertise).
as usual the rich are well placed to ride this out (and indeed will make more money out of the crisis to the extent that they are invested in oil) but the poor of all countries will take the beating.
the suffering will be pretty much incalculable.
now the US as a country (as the world's reserve currency and net energy exporter) is well placed to ride this out, the other countries of the world that are not oil or gas producers will take a beating.
it could be argued that this is a blow against china (and, as a by-blow, other far east economies) in the sense that this is where the oil from the strait of hormuz goes - but no, china has far greater oil reserves than the US and is better placed to ride it out.
arguably russia is one of the few countries to do better out of the crisis - it gets an export market for its oil and gas. (the people of russia do not benefit from this, the oil and gas they would have used gets exported)
but (similar to covid, the 2008 financial crisis, the ukraine war gas price shock) things that harm the global economy can have side effects in terms of weaning states and populations off oil and driving the electrification of the economy. of course the economic effects of the crisis will limit the ability of the governments, companies, people, to electrify their energy supply or require greater effort to do so.
there is the further benefit that the production and consumption that does not happen does not generate the CO2 it would have generated which is then not dumped in the atmosphere, does not contribute to global warming etc.
further, while gas supplies from the US will drive the EU towards them the knowledge that it was the US that kicked off this crisis will drive the EU (and the rest of the world) away and towards greater independence from the US.
of course horsemouth may just be overthinking it. the direct benefactors are the oil companies (who can now charge a much higher price for their product) and the states that produce oil and gas (and who can get their oil and gas to market).
we may just have witnesses the beginning of the fall of the US as world hegemon. this does not mean that china will simply and directly replace it or that the world will become multipolar (a bloodbath of competing powers).
-----------------------------
ok having opened up this issue horsemouth will return to it soon.


