Home | About | Donate

Deconstructing Shell’s “Memories of the Future”


Deconstructing Shell’s “Memories of the Future”

Andy Rowell

For a while now a growing number of people have been asking a series of pertinent questions about Shell’s Arctic drilling operations, which could probably be boiled down to this:

Why would the global oil giant risk billions of dollars of its own money, irreparable damage to a pristine environment, as well as exacerbate climate change by drilling in the Arctic for oil that we can never afford to burn?


Despite the alleged hand wringing and the ‘only after careful consideration’ approval dance staged by the administration for the media and the public, mention needs be made of the international ‘oil rush’ - a modern day ‘Klondike Gold Rush’ staking national claims through a visible extraction presence in the arctic (facts on the ground). We’re all doing it up north say the circumpolar nations. We gotta! We just gotta!

Well we don’t gotta nothing and neither do they. The name on the rig doesn’t matter, our rigs - their rigs… who really unleashes the dogs of oil?

Shell is drooling at the chance to drill for oil and always will be just like any oil company is. However, it is not so much the dogs of oil were being held back by a governmental leash…

…it is more that the various governments pointed north and gave the command 'Sic 'em!.

The question is asked why drill in the arctic despite a glut of oil? Well just maybe part of the answer (in addition to the usual greed) is that this should be called war oil.

An oil reserve big enough for a big WAR. Big war like WW2 sized all out all in war. Thousands of ships, planes, tanks, trucks… you need oil for a big war.

Is there such a big scale war in the world’s future? Let’s hope not but in WW2 America was a major oil producer but these days we import oil. Arctic oil is in effect a necessary component … for a big scale war. Say hi to the Russians up there… and they’ll say hi to us.


In this age of corporate control and PR firms working overtime to green-wash the images and reputations of the worst offenders (up to and including Pres. Bush employing Karen Hughes’ PR firm to tell Iraqis–and theoretically convince them–that the destruction of their nation somehow constituted bringing in “freedom and Democracy”), websites like this one carry comments by persons on industries’ payrolls.

The most redundant talking points always invert power and turn it onto citizens.

This is done even when:

  1. Media tells lies all the time, 24/7
  2. Major election vote counts are proven fraudulent
  3. Draconian controls are placed on citizens’ right to free assembly, protest, free speech
  4. Whistleblowers and inconvenient truth tellers are placed into the legal system’s handcuffs (or worse)
  5. Major treaties that determine things as personal as our access to birth control or what we eat are executed by and for corporations behind secreted closed doors
  6. All of these trends are spreading to other “free” nations
  7. Local police departments are treating citizens (at this point, the protocol is mostly aimed at Blacks, Muslims, and some Latinos) like “enemy combatants”

I am glad that other writers are noticing how slick language is often used to turn the perpetrator into the innocent party to thereby invert causality:

"And in the article we find a clue as to Shell’s internal mentality: Shell’s quest for Arctic oil, is “not about Shell exploring for hydrocarbons in the Arctic,” says Dave McCormick, who worked for the Shell for 30 years, including on the Scenarios team from 2002 to 2009. “It’s society that is demanding this energy.”

“If you stop and pause for a moment you realise that the thinking behind Shell’s Arctic adventure is totally and utterly flawed. The company is trying to absolve itself from blame for its own actions. It is society to blame forcing Shell into the Arctic, and not the company itself.”

This protocol is used OFTEN in C.D. comment threads. It blames the average individual for the type of power abuse and containment of energy options that belongs to today’s high stakes’ corporate oligarchs.