... the group's mission - to "encourage people, businesses and governments to choose Ethical Oil from Canada, its oil sands and other liberal democracies" - is pointless.
... Whatever oil Saudi Arabia or Canada (or Venezuela or Nigeria or Russia) produces will be bought by someone ("...China and about a hundred other countries...") — every last drop of it.
... let’s not pretend this will help Burka-imprisoned women in Riyadh.
... If you want to hurt the Saudis, there is one thing you can do: Depress the global demand for oil by using less of it. Get out of your car and walk. Buy a Prius instead of an SUV. But these are steps that you’ll never hear from oil sands-boosters — for reasons you can all figure out on your own.So the "one thing" we can do is down to something he's already said can't work and would wreck our own economy to boot. And somehow I suspect those "reasons you can figure out on your own" have everything to do with greedy "oil sands-boosters" (Kay's eco-boosterism).
Also, Kay all but ignores the fact that the Saudis are ticked off enough to engage in a scurvy lawfare campaign to suppress EthicalOil's ad which has in turn brought more attention to the ad and to Saudi human rights abuses. Where's the downside?
The column is nit-witted on many levels most of which are pointed out in all 17+ responses in the digital edition of the Post. Here are some teasers:)
Jonathon is out of his depth again....
Nothing like attempting to throw cold water on a hot issue, Mr. Kay. ...
Maybe if we use less of Jonathan Kay it will depress his wages and he can get a job selling used Toyotas instead....
... the ehtical oil ad makes a point that need to be made. It isn't about decreasing anyone's dependence on Saudi oil, Jonathon, it is about defending the integrity of our own oil sources.
... This is a great argument for the individual or a state to do nothing - to absolve oneself of moral responsibility.
How on earth did a right-of-centre paper appoint such a shallow scribe as its editor? ...
Seems JK is fully trained to remain morally neutral (neutered) when considering sharia laws to be ethical....
Ms Kay, (to quote SNL) "you ignorant slut". It's not about the oil stupid. ...
... Mr. Kay has completely missed the point here. Poorly written; poorly thought out.
Jonathan needs to go over to his Mom's place for dinner so she can straighten him out.
3 comments:
Rather a lot of non-sensical mushings I would say. That others will be the non ethical oil if we do not is true, but it misses the point which is the difference between ethical and non ethical oil. Then he makes the claim that to be more effective one should use less oil by walking and whatever, overlooking the fact that the rest of the world will continue using more oil.
Yes, it's a lame column, even lamer than most of Kay's recent musings.
The ethical oil debate is phony. We compete with the Saudis to sell oil. Ezra, Canada's best known feminist, is quacking at Saudi Arabia for not letting women drive. They threaten lawsuits. It's just a forgettable skirmish that will amount to nothing...except sell Ezra's books. Everybody can point fingers at some other country and find some thing and say they are unethical. It's meaningless.
What Ezra has effectively done is change the channel from people's concerns about the environment to having this silly debate about whose oil is most worthy. Yawn.
The are much stronger arguments to defend our oilsands. A consumer in the US is purchasing on the basis of the most pure oil. Denigrating the Saudis is the weakest argument.
Post a Comment