First, where do events such as the 1952 CIA-backed Batista coup in Cuba, or the 1945 meeting between Roosevelt and Ibn Saud fit into this? The latter established a relationship between the United States and the Gulf monarchies; the former secured the shipping lane out of the Gulf of Mexico. (For that matter, the 1973 coup in Chile against Salvador Allende.)
Second, why are you calling it the "petro-AI" instead of the "AI-dollar"? The latter would seem to make more sense.
Third: "In 1962 I was a Conservative. I believed privilege could only be justified by service, high taxes on very high incomes were necessary to prevent an entrepreneurial economy becoming a rentier economy, and Keynesian growth would finance public service improvements and a welfare state that steadily reduced inequality. I was suspicious of ideologically driven, large-scale change. These were the mainstream policies of the Macmillan government at the time. In 60 years I have moved from centre right to hard left without changing my opinions."
Fourth: It must be remembered that 1975 was after numerous external shocks, notably the 1967 closure of the Suez Canal and the 1973 OPEC oil embargo (and the 1971 Nixon shock, if you're not in the United States). Keynes managed the UK economy through three major shocks, those being two global wars and a massive economic downturn between them. The lessons had been forgotten a quarter-century later.
Fascinating article. You end with " The petro-AI is being born. You are the witness to the transition. You are the relay. End the coup. Or it never ends."
However, I hate it when harbingers of historic journalism issue warnings without any concrete actions to follow.
- Fess up — we all know there's a problem. What the hell do you want us to do about it? Provide clear steps or call to action.
We can start by transitioning to a world wherein all energy is renewable, decentralised, local and free at the point of delivery. Figure the rest out after this is achieved.
Once again fascinating Mike, and brilliant. Quick question though, When you say we have the choice to end this—please elaborate?
The system never sleeps; they work in overdrive and they’re constantly bombarding us with propaganda and lies. So how exactly do we take this country back?
What steps do you suggest, outside of what’s already being done—No Kings, letters to the political class that does the “Systems” bidding and working with legal and electoral reform groups and possibly staging general strikes.
And as for the petrodollar—reserve currency, I 100% agree; we’ve lost ground (BRIC) and recent idiotic decisions and our debt and deficits are making that reality more than a prophecy.
However, in stage three, are suggesting that the AI petrodollar will be a digital currency backed by a countries energy stockpiles; or more aptly the oil companies? And if so, how do we stop it?
Once again, brilliant work and sorry if I’m a bit slow. Yesterday was an incredible newsletter—which was illuminating.
I had previously read about the religious connections between Jesus, Krishna Mithras, Horus, and Osiris; all sharing similar philosophy’s and humble beginnings, but missed the philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates.
Thanks again, and enjoy the rest of your weekend—should you decide to put down your pen and take breather…:)
I like the arc of the story - though using rentier to describe the whole AI sector is too much. Data centres need to be built etc. I get the distinction between thatcher and her successors but you can do this without making her into a shining knight of freedom. You are completely wrong about the UK in the 1970s and completely wrong if you equate thatchers market freedom with freedom per se. Both her a Reagan began (despite whatever sincerity and residual republican decency you might impute) the slide into what you describe.
Your article explains a lot, and it does seem to be based on fact rather than opinion. I understand that you're writing more as a philosopher-essayist, so you're genre is reflection and argument, where the logic itself is the point. However it would be great if you would cite some sources at the end the way many other Substack authors do.
A few notes:
First, where do events such as the 1952 CIA-backed Batista coup in Cuba, or the 1945 meeting between Roosevelt and Ibn Saud fit into this? The latter established a relationship between the United States and the Gulf monarchies; the former secured the shipping lane out of the Gulf of Mexico. (For that matter, the 1973 coup in Chile against Salvador Allende.)
Second, why are you calling it the "petro-AI" instead of the "AI-dollar"? The latter would seem to make more sense.
Third: "In 1962 I was a Conservative. I believed privilege could only be justified by service, high taxes on very high incomes were necessary to prevent an entrepreneurial economy becoming a rentier economy, and Keynesian growth would finance public service improvements and a welfare state that steadily reduced inequality. I was suspicious of ideologically driven, large-scale change. These were the mainstream policies of the Macmillan government at the time. In 60 years I have moved from centre right to hard left without changing my opinions."
Fourth: It must be remembered that 1975 was after numerous external shocks, notably the 1967 closure of the Suez Canal and the 1973 OPEC oil embargo (and the 1971 Nixon shock, if you're not in the United States). Keynes managed the UK economy through three major shocks, those being two global wars and a massive economic downturn between them. The lessons had been forgotten a quarter-century later.
Fascinating article. You end with " The petro-AI is being born. You are the witness to the transition. You are the relay. End the coup. Or it never ends."
However, I hate it when harbingers of historic journalism issue warnings without any concrete actions to follow.
- Fess up — we all know there's a problem. What the hell do you want us to do about it? Provide clear steps or call to action.
We can start by transitioning to a world wherein all energy is renewable, decentralised, local and free at the point of delivery. Figure the rest out after this is achieved.
Once again fascinating Mike, and brilliant. Quick question though, When you say we have the choice to end this—please elaborate?
The system never sleeps; they work in overdrive and they’re constantly bombarding us with propaganda and lies. So how exactly do we take this country back?
What steps do you suggest, outside of what’s already being done—No Kings, letters to the political class that does the “Systems” bidding and working with legal and electoral reform groups and possibly staging general strikes.
And as for the petrodollar—reserve currency, I 100% agree; we’ve lost ground (BRIC) and recent idiotic decisions and our debt and deficits are making that reality more than a prophecy.
However, in stage three, are suggesting that the AI petrodollar will be a digital currency backed by a countries energy stockpiles; or more aptly the oil companies? And if so, how do we stop it?
Once again, brilliant work and sorry if I’m a bit slow. Yesterday was an incredible newsletter—which was illuminating.
I had previously read about the religious connections between Jesus, Krishna Mithras, Horus, and Osiris; all sharing similar philosophy’s and humble beginnings, but missed the philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates.
Thanks again, and enjoy the rest of your weekend—should you decide to put down your pen and take breather…:)
Is the security guarantee Kissinger gave Prince Fahd the ultimate reason no Saudis were ever prosecuted for 9/11?
Rentier Coalition. Good term, thank you.
I like the arc of the story - though using rentier to describe the whole AI sector is too much. Data centres need to be built etc. I get the distinction between thatcher and her successors but you can do this without making her into a shining knight of freedom. You are completely wrong about the UK in the 1970s and completely wrong if you equate thatchers market freedom with freedom per se. Both her a Reagan began (despite whatever sincerity and residual republican decency you might impute) the slide into what you describe.
read the play by play of the Kissinger/Saudi deal is here:
"The Oil Kings: How the U.S., Iran, and Saudi Arabia Changed the Balance of Power in the Middle East" By Andrew Scott Cooper
The book is sourced from the notes of Kissinger's Chief of Staff, Brent Scowcroft
Thank you for pointing out that, whatever their problems, Reagan and Thatcher were a lot better than either their haters or acolytes think.
Your article explains a lot, and it does seem to be based on fact rather than opinion. I understand that you're writing more as a philosopher-essayist, so you're genre is reflection and argument, where the logic itself is the point. However it would be great if you would cite some sources at the end the way many other Substack authors do.
Correct. Sam Seder a decade ago:
https://youtu.be/Ox2dV6YA7KA?si=qUB4tqD7Otw69RuP
Meanwhile,
https://youtu.be/U1GYpihSSEY?si=F7jXpYD4PbiQISP_