Yellowed Brick Road? Ick.

Professor J, 

Don't eat the snow on the Yellow(ed) Brick Road...got it. lol

Perhaps we have a misunderstanding, I'm not referring to all regulation as punishment, but what concerns me about additional regulation at this point would be that there hasn't been a thorough investigation (I hardly think that the blame passing fiasco masquerading as a Congressional hearing we have seen could be called a serious investigation, let alone thorough). I was referring to additional regulation being added based only on speculation about what went wrong.

I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt. It is easy to toss the blame on the guy who is getting paid the most money and has the big title (and yes, being held ultimately responsible comes with, or should). I think that is too simple, though.  Who to blame is only one part of the question.  Isn't part of the problem also the corporate culture (the atmosphere of which, the CEO and board, create and are ultimately responsible for)? Greedy top executives and their minions may indeed be guilty of criminal negligence that resulted in the deaths of eleven people along with the eco-tragedy. I can't help but wonder if there isn't a small person who went unheard in all of this; a worker on the rig or an engineer.  I don't mean "small" in any sense of one's innate worth, but rather, the lack of power he wields in the grand scheme of things.  I'd like to know how this company handles complaints and concerns from the people "on the ground" and what their record is on how they deal with whistle blowers, or when the last time production was held up over safety concerns was. It seems extremely likely to me that someone at some point has probably raised concerns about what they've seen or knew was going on. Most large companies do not handle those situations well and even the ever popular "open door policy" is generally a sham.  For a company to have a genuine desire to behave responsibly, and give even low level employees the freedom to question policies and procedures and raise concerns, is rare and may indeed be too much to ask. To hope for such a thing may mean that I am now operating on a fantasy level equal to yours.

The complexity and sheer size of these multinationals, I think we agree, make it nearly impossible to find out where the actual error, crime, or some combination thereof occurred and at whose feet the blame should be laid. Is it possible that we've created systems so complex and tightly bound in bureaucracy, run by boards and committees instead of individuals, that it is nearly impossible to hold anyone accountable?  It seems a very effective tangled web has been woven, making it difficult to even realize when we've been deceived.

I'm posting here a link to an article about the Exxon Valdez oil spill and the birth of credit default swaps that you mentioned in your previous post, in case anyone else besides me didn't already know this.

I don't disagree with anything in your proposed solution, I think proper oversight, enforcement of existing regulation, and  changes so that those responsible would be held personally accountable (instead of skating off to Siberia with a big bag of money) would go a long way in the right direction. Good luck with that. Don't we often see people in some of these government oversight positions eventually run off to work for the oil companies? Best not to get too testy with them then, or you may be out of a posh job later on, conflict of interest be damned (It seems I recently heard that policy was changed to prevent this, but I've lost track of that discussion).

Another question: You dismiss the idea of our gradually changing our behavior over time, even though we are seeing some progress, though not enough to abate your sense of urgency.  You said, "Addicts rarely taper down to success, even with help. Cold turkey is still the most effective long-term behavior changer, primarily because of its completeness and its searing agony." Now "Worst Case Scenario Girl's" brain is running amok envisioning what you mean here. Could you clarify? Specifically, do you mean cold turkey as a planned action imposed by someone in power, or a natural occurrence? Don't bother elaborating on the "searing agony"; unfortunately I have a very vivid image of what that might look like.


The problem of the world we've created is that so few of us are, in any meaningful way, self sufficient, and therefore at the mercy of those with real power, which your movie (one of my favorites)'s quote so chillingly illustrates.


The fragility of  the system we've created is disturbing.  The oil is tied not only to food production in a massive way (several campaigns are underway to call attention to that and change thinking), but to food distribution. I think people subconsciously know this, even if they haven't consciously thought of it.  It's  probably part of that underlying feeling we have that something built into the system is very scary and our interdependent lifestyles are precarious.  The full realization of just how little disturbance it would take for that complex network to collapse and what it would mean for our collective psyche (especially when so few have entertained such possibilities), not to mention the physical reality, would be perhaps the most agonizing of all.

Oh Professor! Our discussions always cheer me so!