Neanderthal Man On Facile Fuel

I am terrible, truly, with understanding conspiracy theories. Surely I've proven my ineptitude in the last two essays here at Contratimes. But since I am so obtuse, I have concluded that I must practice a bit, doing problem solving right before the public. Like this:

If it is the case that the Bush Administration is in cahoots with Big Oil; nay, if it is the case that the Republican Party is up to its neck in Big Oil, then we must conclude that it is a fairly counterproductive relationship. Moreover, if the American automakers are in cahoots with Republicans and Big Oil, maintaining obscenely inefficient gas consumption/mileage standards (CAFE standards), and that they also stubbornly refuse to create more fuel-efficient engines so Big Oil can sell more oil, then I am indeed obtuse. The next thing I am going to hear is that Hollywood is producing more movies and that Major League Baseball schedules 162 games per team per season so Big Oil can sell as much gas to moviegoers and baseball fans as possible. But I am only gassing.

If the Bush Administration, Detroit automakers, and Big Oil are in dark, oily cahoots, how is it that they maintain this conspiracy when it is so utterly backfiring? President Bush's approval rating sputters around 30-35%; Detroit is unloading thousands of workers; people are buying hybrid cars and more efficient Japanese vehicles; Big Oil burns rubber rushing to justify its record profits. What, pray tell, is the political gain in all of this? Where is the great benefit?

Of course, the great benefit is to be found in the Democratic Party. But the incoherence of the "conspiracy" suggests little more than that the conspiracy is indeed incoherent: the theory explains far too little. And with Republicans perhaps poised to lose control of both the House and Senate in November, one might conclude that the conspiracy between the powers in High Places is not what it seems. But it is a conspiracy working wonders–perhaps–for Democrats.

***

What happens when you buy less of product X? What happens when everybody buys less of product X? Do the producers of X continue to produce as much X as when more units were being sold? They do if they are stupid businessfolk. But if they are good businessfolk they will cut production, and cut their costs. For example, when Detroit begins to sell fewer domestic cars, it produces fewer of them; and it cuts jobs that are no longer needed. What it does not do is sell its cars on the cheap (though some Detroit promos came close).

How then is it that rational people believe that if each one of us buys LESS gasoline we will drive the prices down? For if we CONSERVE fuel, will not the producers of that fuel just scale back production? Or do we think that they will produce so much fuel there will be a massive surplus standing on a street corner with its hands in its pockets, and that they will be forced to sell it to us at some ridiculously low price? (And, curiously, if America produces MORE oil domestically in an effort to reduce American dependence on foreign oil, foreign oil producers will simply scale back production or sales for our market, thus maintaining our dependence on that portion we CANNOT produce for ourselves. Or do I have this wrong?)

***

Hopefully you know that President Bush's approval ratings are in the tank (no doubt due to those expensive gas tanks we fill everyday). But it must be asked: The people who respond to these polls designed to track a president's popularity, from where do they get their information about the president? Do they listen to his every press conference from start to finish? Do they read his every piece of correspondence? Do they visit the White House website daily to read Tony Snow's press briefs? Do they download PDFs spelling out current White House agendas?

It is no stretch to say that the answer to each of the last four questions is a rather easily uttered, "No." Most people don't even hear President Bush speak but a few seconds a month; most people read but a few sentences of his ideas a year. Most Americans are indeed ignorant of the President firsthand; egads, they are ignorant of the whereabouts of Iraq or even the White House. In fact, many Americans are often chided for knowing how to find Wal-Mart in a blizzard without knowing how to find the First Amendment on a Bill of Rights. But when it comes to negative approval ratings, Americans suddenly become something of a collective political genius. It is truly stunning that pundits, particularly those on the Left (right now), find that the majority of Americans know not only how bad President Bush is, they know how a good president should perform his duties. Let us ignore the telling fact that this is the same majority that "believed that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11", as so many tedious analysts have scoffingly opined since the beginning of time.

Look. We all know majorities are "enlightened" when they agree with you and "Neanderthals" when they don't. But the Neanderthals of a few years ago now "understand" that the President is incompetent. What would be really interesting is to take a poll to determine how highly Americans approve of themselves. I am sure there would be convincing data proving that Americans always think rather highly of their own grand capacities. Heaven knows we can now safely conclude from sundry polls that the vast majority of Americans know how to run a country. What a relief.

Peace.

©Bill Gnade 2006/Contratimes - All Rights Reserved.

Technorati tags: Big Oil, oil prices, Gas Prices, Approval Ratings, Conspiracy Theories