Supporting the oil and gas industry is communism

The title is an exaggeration. But, perhaps not as much of an exaggeration as it seems on the surface. Especially in comparison with all of the other things I see people calling "communism" on a regular basis.

For instance, our support of the oil and gas industry is inherently more communist than socialism. And I see people claiming that socialism IS communism rather frequently.

Rather than jumping into verbose definitions of communism I'll talk a bit more about what it means. There isn't much point in relying on textbook definitions here because, as I said, the title is an exaggeration of sorts. But then, so too is claiming things like "socialism is communism". So, I'd rather focus on why those comparisons exist in the first place, and why this is more true of our support of oil and gas than it is of socialism.

And that is a short walk; people see taxation as a means of giving your money to those less deserving. And this certainly is something that would happen under a traditional communist state. However, as I've argued in the past, there are several key differences. In communism, it isn't simply that you pay taxes, it is actually more that your income is brought up or down to match what everyone else makes and that this social equilibrium is the end game in and of itself. It isn't done for your benefit, or even for the benefit of those on the receiving end. It is done purely for the benefit of the community. 

The belief is that all jobs are important but that capitalism degrades the value of certain jobs. By rewarding everyone equally, the theory is that people will be able to work at what they are best at without worrying that capitalism will erase their jobs.

And, here we get the first hint; communism tends to require the state to implement and enforce it, so it gets compared to other political systems. But, it is really more an answer to capitalism which is more of an economic system than a political one. But, more on that in a bit.

Socialism and taxes can, if you refuse to look any further than taxation, seem like communism. But, it ends as soon as it begins. Firstly, socialist taxes do NOT make every one equal. You are still incentivized to earn more than other people, because even after taxes, in most systems, you end up ranked exactly the same and thus you still enjoy the benefits of that extra money. As a direct result of that, the system can be seen to encourage you not to do what you're most suited to doing, but to rather do that which makes you the most money. You're still in a capitalist society. 

Also, and here is probably the biggest difference, taxes are taken from you for your own benefit and the benefit of others. I'm writing this having received a public education. Taxes paid to educate me. They also paid for my healthcare. These are tangible benefits to me. Yes, they help others as well. And we are taxed for these things specifically for the benefits that they can bring to the individuals. Not just society as a whole. That being said... society as a whole is a collection of individuals. And as you improve the lives of individuals you also improve society on the whole. 

Put another way, if socialism were implemented only just before I was born, the quality of my education likely would have been substantially worse as we likely would be substantially less developed as a nation. 

That societal growth may sound like communism again. Aren't we working for the good of the community? The differences are more subtle, but still present. Communism is more about benefiting the community through equality than it is for advancement. Under communism, losses are as much a virtue as gains so long as they bring everyone closer to equilibrium. THAT is the communal good it seeks. And this is why I said that communism isn't about how the transfer of wealth affects either the person it is taken from or the person who receives it.

Under socialism (assuming it isn't corrupt... and yes, that may be a big assumption), taxes are used with the intention of bringing benefits to individuals. How we quantify the gains can make the math seem muddy at times. For instance, if a person or group with humanitarian values pass a law that benefits the poor with no obvious gains for the broader society they will see a moral gain. Whereas, a rigid capitalist may see no value in the move at all and declare it to be communism. But, it doesn't make it so.

How does this all tie back to oil and gas? Well, economically speaking, it is clear at this junction that renewables are the future. Many renewables are already cheaper to produce than fossil fuels and the rest are simply getting closer every day. And none of this is news. We've known, pretty conclusively for at least the last 5-10 years that this would happen. We also know that the oil and gas industry cannot last. Both because economically, renewables will simply crush that industry and also because it is a finite resource and we are running out of it.

So, capitalists and socialists SHOULD understand that continued support of the oil and gas industry is NOT in our best interest. Why would we pay for a more expensive, unsustainable energy source? And the answer is generally to support the people working in those industries. To keep them employed. To achieve an employment equilibrium of sorts.

When you CHOOSE oil and gas based solutions over renewables you are not doing it for your benefit. You don't gain anything. You are paying more for a resource which could be gotten for less. Worse, you are slowing down the advancement of renewables by diverting that investment away from it and you're contributing to pollution and climate change. All moves which hurt you and society both now and in the future.

Both capitalism AND socialism dictate that we SHOULD be supporting renewables. Especially at the current stage of things where they are already most cost effective. And yet, there is much resistance. And worse, a major part of the reason why fossil fuel based energy has persisted for so long is government subsidies. Remember when I said that communism only generally works when the government is involved? Well, in this case the government isn't forcing you. But, they are manipulating you into supporting this industry by artificially deflating prices. 

In a capitalist environment you don't need to subsidize the better solution. A better product will naturally garner greater demand all on its own. And in a socialist society the only time a government should need to step in is to speed up a transition between technologies. There aren't many good reasons for governments to be interfering in the market of a mature industry like the oil and gas industry.