Solar power, a better alternative to fascist Russian gas
The Shock Doctrine is the idea that, when disasters or wars strike, conservatives try to use the events to push their existing agenda, such as privatization of important government functions, in response. Republicans have foisted such policies in places as far-flung as Iraq and New Orleans. We have argued that, in turn, Democrats should institute their policies, i.e. a Liberal Shock Doctrine, when they are in power and disasters and wars occur. That might include, for example, stronger gun safety laws after the shock of a mass shooting, or the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, including government stimulus payments and other federal aid, which Congressional Democrats and President Joe Biden successfully brought about in 2021 after Donald Trump‘s inaction in the face of the COVID pandemic plunged the U.S. into a recession in 2020.
Russia‘s shocking and tragic invasion of Ukraine presents another opportunity for the United States, and countries around the world, to create a liberal version of the Shock Doctrine. First, countries can promote the idea of democracy (which is well-represented by Ukraine) instead of fascist dictatorship, exemplified by Russia and Vladimir Putin. But in addition, there is one specific policy that the U.S. and the world should be pushing right now:
That policy is renewable energy, such as solar and wind power. The reason is that, as described by Reuters:
As the crisis between Russia and the West deepens on the borders of Ukraine, Europe and Russia’s long interdependence on one another for energy has become a critical bargaining piece on both sides.
Gas and oil-rich Russia is linked to European energy markets through a series of critical pipelines, the biggest flowing through Ukraine, which have become chokepoints for both sides in the negotiations to avert the growing crisis.
In other words, numerous European countries rely on Russia to some degree for their energy needs. We have already seen how such dependence in other regions leads to threats, blackmail and war, such as the first Gulf War, which was sparked when Iraq invaded oil-rich Kuwait. Indeed, Japan‘s attack on the United States Navy at Pearl Harbor was largely about Japan’s need for oil. Thus, it follows that the more that European countries can wean themselves off of Russian oil and gas, the more they will not be susceptible to Russia’s geopolitical threats (such as cutting off energy supplies if such countries do not kowtow to Russia). By extension, this applies to relationships between nations all over the world. The way to achieve such energy independence, especially where such countries do not have their own adequate oil and gas resources, is renewable energy.
Moreover, increased use of clean renewable energy not only lessens the dependence of various nations on dictatorships hungry to bully and invade, it also fights climate change, which remains arguably the number one existential threat that we all face. Accordingly, unlike the Republican-style Shock Doctrine, the Liberal Shock Doctrine that we propose actually achieves very good things.
Photo by Oregon Department of Transportation, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/xzjNrs
