Alberta’s Rockefeller coups, Part 6: The Financial Frauds of American Empire Are Driving Climate Disaster, But Both Could Still Be Thwarted

Taylor 2019_{pp. ix + back-cover blurbs} ^{(“ground-breaking”; “authoritative historical study of significance”; “triumph”)}_, 12-13 ^{(‘Imperial Oil was Canada’s defender against Standard Oil “octopus”; Liberals systematically dismantled protectionist measures shielding Imperial Oil from Rockefellers’)}_, 51-52 ^{(1898: ’remarkably generous takeover prevented lawsuits & criticism; as usual, Standard achieved its objective secretly’)} Graham D. Taylor Imperial Standard: Imperial Oil, Exxon and the Canadian oil industry from 1880 Calgary: University of Calgary 2019

(_{p. ix + back-cover blurbs}: “This is not an”official” history of Imperial Oil Ltd. I received no financial support from Imperial Oil, Exxon/Mobil or any of their affiliates … I have used material that is available to any researcher.”

“… a triumph” — Mira Wilkins, Florida International University

“… authoritative historical study … of significance” — Geoffrey Jones, Harvard

“… a ground-breaking contribution” — David Breen, UBC)

↩︎

Boychuk 2023d_nn. 8-12 ^{(sources & excerpts on 1st Round Table attempt to transfer AB to US: 1908-9)} Regan Boychuk “Canada is an American protectorate & Alberta is an imperial bezzle: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part five” York University Capital-as-Power blog (22 July 2023)

Pratt 1980b_pp. 816-17 ^{(‘Gulf Oil + Texaco were born at Spindletop & brought 1st substantial alterations in old order of near monopoly control by Standard Oil + formed core of oligopolistic order characterizing industry since’)}_{, 818-20, 825} ^{(‘at time of Spindletop discovery, Standard could not operate legally in Texas; in 20 yrs after, Standard remained focus of antitrust activities of Texas attorney general’)} Joseph A. Pratt “The petroleum industry in transition: Antitrust and the decline of monopoly control in oil” Journal of Economic History v40#4 (December 1980): 815-37

(_pp. 816-17: ’The modern market structure in the petroleum industry emerged in the first two decades of the twentieth century, as new competitors rose to challenge the monopoly position exercised by Standard Oil in the late nineteenth century.

The symbol for this change both in the popular mind and in the historical literature has been the US Supreme Court’s dissolution of Standard Oil in 1911. …

… The discovery of oil at Spindletop in 1901 probably had a greater impact on the petroleum industry’s market structure than did the development of any other American oil field in the twentieth century.

Gulf Oil and Texaco were born at Spindletop. …

The major new firms that grew out of the Gulf coast fields brought the first substantial alterations in the old order of near monopoly control by Standard Oil, and their subsequent growth, along with the expansion of several of the companies created by the dissolution of Standard in 1911, formed the core of the oligopolistic order that has since characterized the petroleum industry.’)

(_{pp. 818-20, 825}: ’A reexamination of events in the industry in the first decades of the twentieth century suggests … that existing research generally underestimates the impact of legal and political factors in explaining the rise of oligopoly in oil. …

Events in Texas were of special importance in these years, and the manner in which that state enforced its corporation laws encouraged the transition from near monopoly in oil in 1900 to near oligopoly by 1911. …

… A very hostile political environment blocked Standard’s open and aggressive entry into the newly discovered Texas oil fields.

Legal obstacles to its operations and strong public suspicion of its motives and methods made Standard the focus of much political attention.

Such constraints did not completely prevent Standard from entering the field, but they did limit the extent to which “the Trust” could attempt to control this major new source of oil.

Under the antitrust law in effect in Texas at the time of the Spindletop discovery, Standard could not operate legally in that state. Passed in 1889, one year before the Congress of the United States passed the Sherman Antitrust Act, this strict law prohibited combinations in restraint of trade and blocked one company from owning stock in another. …

… In the twenty years after Spindletop, Standard remained the object of public scrutiny and the focus of the antitrust activities of the Texas attorney general. …

… Even in 1917, six years after the dissolution of Standard, the FTC replied unfavorably to such a proposal.

Finally, in 1925 the formal, legal purchase of Magnolia by Standard of New York took place.

Thus, for twenty-four years the growth of this “secret” Standard affiliate was shaped by the political system’s periodical assaults on its Standard connections.’)

Fox News 19/8/22 ^{(‘victory of American-made warship over allegedly invincible Royal Navy in early days of war inspired patriotic fervor across new nation’)} Lifestyle reporter Kerry J. Byrne “On this day in history, August 19, 1812, Old Ironsides legend born in smashing victory over Royal Navy: USS Constitution routed HMS Guerriere in open sea battle, proved might of fledgling US Navy” Fox News (19 August 2022)

USS Constitution Museum ^{(reason lifestyle reporter necessary)} “The HMS Guerriere battle” USS Constitution Museum (no date)

(’USS Constitution, under the command of Captain Isaac Hull, sailed from Boston on August 2, 1812 and steered for the blustery waters southeast of Halifax, Nova Scotia.

After two weeks of daily gun drills in preparation for combat, Hull and his crew sighted the British frigate HMS Guerriere, under the command of Captain James Richard Dacres, on the afternoon of August 19, 1812. …

… It was not the first American naval victory of the war (that honor went to USS Essex’s crew, who captured HMS Alerton on August 13), but it established Constitution as a household name.’)

↩︎

Low 2009_p. 800 ^{(‘only safeguard against rule of capture is to be 1st to get to work’)} Cecilia A. Low “The rule of capture: Its current status and some issues to consider” Alberta Law Review v46#3 (June 2009): 799-829

(_p. 800: ’The rule of capture is a common law principle rooted in the early law relating to groundwater and ferae naturae.

It developed as a no liability rule in situations where the object of dispute was an unconfined, percolating, or wild thing, the behaviour of which was not well understood and which was not easily subject to application of traditional property law principles.

The rule of capture was first raised in an oil and gas law context in Canada in the case of Borys v. C.P.R. {1953 CanLII 414 (UK JCPC)}

The case was ultimately decided by the Privy Council and while the rule of capture was not necessary to the decision, Lord Porter provided a useful description of the traditional rule of capture case in oil and gas when he said:

“… The only safeguard is to be the first to get to work, in which case, those who make the recovery become owners of the material which they withdraw from any well which is situated on their property or from which they have the authority to draw.”’)

AFN 2018_p. 2 ^{(‘legal & moral justification for colonial dispossession; invalidly based on presumed racial superiority; the very foundation of genocide’)} Assembly of First Nations “Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery” (January 2018): 8pp

(_p. 2: ’The Doctrine of Discovery emanates from a series of Papal Bulls (formal statements from the Pope) and extensions, originating in the 1400s.

Discovery was used as legal and moral justification for colonial dispossession of sovereign Indigenous Nations, including First Nations in what is now Canada.

During the European “Age of Discovery”, Christian explorers “claimed” lands for their monarchs who felt they could exploit the land, regardless of the original inhabitants.

This was invalidly based on the presumed racial superiority of European Christian peoples and was used to dehumanize, exploit and subjugate Indigenous Peoples and dispossess us of our most basic rights.

This was the very foundation of genocide.

Such ideology led to practices that continue through modern-day laws and policies.

The Assembly of First Nations remains deeply concerned about the contemporary ramifications of the doctrine of discovery and other discriminatory practices.

Now is the time for Canada to finally and formally end any reliance on the doctrine of discovery.’)

Ely 1938_p. 1244 ^{(Jul`34: ‘Britain very promptly legislated herself out of subservience to rule of capture when petroleum development was projected for the British Isles’)} Northcutt Ely “The conservation of oil” Harvard Law Review v51#7 (May 1938): 1209-44

(_p. 1244: ’Ironically, Great Britain, which bequeathed us the doctrine of Acton v. Blundell, very promptly legislated herself out of subservience to the rule of capture when petroleum development was projected for the British Isles.

… The Petroleum (Production) Act of 1934 purports to vest ownership of oil in Great Britain in the Crown.’)

1953 CanLII 414 (UK JCPC) ^{(years after Leduc #1, rule of capture 1st raised in Cdn o&g law)} Lords Porter, Tucker, Asquith of Bishopstone and Cohen and Rinfret Borys v. C.P.R. Co. et al. United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (12 January 1953): 15pp

Boychuk 2022a ^{(1991 US regulatory coup in AB)} Regan Boychuk “The ‘no-lookback’ deal: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part one” York University Capital-as-Power blog (2 December 2022)

Boychuk 2022b ^{(1992 US political coup in AB)} Regan Boychuk “American style democracy: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part two” York University Capital-as-Power blog (4 December 2022)

ERCB 2013_p. 168 ^{(o&g regulators eliminated prorationing & instituted orphan levy in`94)} Gordon Jaremko Steward: 75 years of Alberta energy regulation Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board 2013

(_p. 168: ‘Oil pro-rationing is eliminated as part of “regulatory streamlining.” … The ERCB institutes an industry levy to clean up orphan wells — sites deserted by former owners.’)

TSLAC 2011_pp. 2 ^{(‘ability to regulate industry hamstrung by legal doctrine of Rule of Capture’)}_, 3 ^{(‘WWI brought 1st attempts to regulate oil industry’)} “The oil wars” in Hazardous Business: Industry, regulation and the Texas Railroad Commission (Austin: Texas State Library and Archives Commission 2011): 9pp

(_p. 2: ’At 10:30am on January 10, 1901, the Spindletop well blew in in spectacular fashion, launching a thousand legends.

… The geyser was finally brought under control on January 19, but not before it had become famous all over the world.

… By 1902, more than 500 companies were doing business in oil storage, pipelines, and refining.

… Amidst the excitement came tremendous waste and pollution. Gushers produced oil uncontrollably, sometimes for days.

The runoff soaked into the ground or was channeled into makeshift tanks. Fires were commonplace, often leaping from one well or tank to the next.

An 1899 Texas law had attempted to set minimum requirements for curbing waste and pollution.

Other oil-producing states, including Oklahoma, Kansas, and California, had also passed laws to try to rein in the free-wheeling industry.

But the ability to regulate the industry was hamstrung by the legal doctrine of the rule of capture.

Local police and state authorities could do little more than look on.’)

(_p. 3: ’The first push for regulation of the industry came during World War I, which revealed the importance of oil to business, transportation, and the military.

The major oil companies formed the first industry group, the National Petroleum War Services Committee (later the American Petroleum Institute) to try to establish procedures to effectively meet the nation’s needs during the war.

… in 1917 the US Bureau of Mines established an experimental station in Oklahoma to study means of improving production.

… Shortly after the end of World War I, vast new discoveries were made in California, Oklahoma, and Texas.

… The nation’s oil reserves were doubled by these finds, and the warnings about waste gave way to a new round of overproduction and cheap prices.’)

↩︎

Pratt 1980a_pp. 74 ^{(‘a central function of API since 1919 founding has been collection & dissemination of statistics’)}_, 74-76 ^{(’no one except Standard Oil routinely gathered info about national trends in production & consumption; during WWI, oil industry largely governed itself under overall direction of president of Standard Oil of New Jersey)}_, 77 ^{(‘A.C. Bedford & other leaders guided creation of 1st national, industrywide trade association, which was patterned after WWI structure’)}_, 82-84 ^{(‘at peak of regulatory pyramid was Texas Railroad Commission, but base of pyramid was API, which guided Bureau of Mines to determine amount of oil produced each month’)}_, 84 ^{(‘API established authority over oil-related statistics so well that not until 1970s did gov begin to produce its own statistics’)} Joseph A. Pratt “Organizing information about the modern oil industry in the formative years of the American Petroleum Institute” Business and Economic History (2^nd series) v9 (1980): 74-86

(_p. 74: ’One central function of the API since its founding in 1919 has been the collection and dissemination of statistics about the production, refining, transporting, and marketing of petroleum and its products.

The harshest critics of the API have cited the use of its statistics by government agencies as evidence of the efforts of “Big Oil” to capture these agencies, thereby subverting the workings of the democratic process. …

In its formative years in the 192Os, the API thus established a tradition of cooperation with government agencies in compiling statistics on the petroleum industry, and this tradition caused little concern until uncertainties about the supply of oil in the 197Os focused political attention on the API’s role as a primary source of information about oil.’)

(_pp. 74-76: ’Before World War I, neither the oil industry or the government had access to systematic, reliable information about the operations of the industry as a whole. …

… no one in the industry except Standard Oil routinely gathered information about national trends in production and consumption of petroleum and its products. …

The resulting void of reliable information about the production, refining, and transportation of petroleum products became a pressing concern with the onset of World War I. …

The need for better information about the supply of petroleum products became more pronounced after the United States entered the war …

After the creation of the Fuel Administration in 1918, the renamed National Petroleum War Service Committee (NPWSC) continued to supply information and guidance to the director of the Oil Division, Mark Requa.

The NPWSC developed a complex system of advisory committees organized both by function and by region under the overall direction of a Central Committee headed by A.C. Bedford, the president of Standard Oil of New Jersey. …

During the war, the oil industry largely govern itself though its industry advisory committees to the Fuel Administration.’)

(_p. 77: ’After the war, the oil industry channeled the war-induced cooperation of the National Petroleum War Service Committee into the first national, industrywide trade association, the American Petroleum Institute.

A. C. Bedford and other leaders in the NPWSC guided the creation of the API, which was patterned after the NPWSC structure …

From the earliest discussions about the possible roles of the API, the collection and dissemination of oil statistics was consistently cited as one of its primary functions.’)

(_pp. 82-84: ’Their most immediate objective in the early 1920s was to dispel the legacy of mistrust inherited from the era of Standard Oil domination before World War I.

They also hoped that comprehensive, current information about the fundamental conditions of supply and demand in the industry could be used to control the cycle of boom and bust that had traditionally plagued the petroleum industry. …

The collection of statistics was thus viewed by the leadership of the API as a means of understanding and ultimately of controlling sources of instability in both the economic and political environments of the industry.

… The institute also became a major source of information for the Federal 0il Conservation Board (FOCB), an interdepartmental advisory agency created in 1924 with a mandate to investigate conditions in the oil industry. In response to the creation of the FOCB, the API appointed a committee to report on the reserves of oil available to the nation.

Although its conclusions — that reserves were sufficient to supply America’s needs and that the lack of significant waste in the industry made conservation efforts by the government unnecessary — raised a chorus of protests from within the industry and from outside critics, its efforts laid the groundwork for the subsequent compilation by the API of an annual estimate of proved oil reserves. …

… Statistics were also an important part of the API’s efforts to shape the general climate of political opinion through public relations work. …

Even after these two functions were separated in 1924, the API’s statistical work continued to complement its public relations efforts. …

The API’s ability to present accurate, comprehensive information about the industry guaranteed its spokesmen ready access to decisionmakers in the public sector.

Such access peaked in the early 1930s, when much of the API’s statistical division was transferred from New York to Washington to help administer the National Recovery Administration’s code for the petroleum industry.

The same years witnessed the emergence of a regulatory system designed to limit the production of crude oil in the name of conservation and of price stability.

At the peak of this regulatory pyramid was the Texas Railroad Commission, which joined with other state commissions in the Southwest to control crude production.

But at the base of the pyramid was the API, which guided the Bureau of Mines in the collection of statistics on market demand that were used by the state commissions to determine the amount of oil to be produced each month.’)

(_p. 84: ‘Indeed, so well did the API establish its authority over oil-related statistics in its formative years that not until the 1970s did the government begin to produce its own statistics on several of the activities originally covered by the API’s statistical department in the 1920s.’)

↩︎

Blair 1976_pp. 34 ^{(Red Line Agreement)}_, 54-56 ^{(“As Is” Agreement)}_, 156-69 ^{(‘by equating conservation w/ economical use, API defined problem away; restricting production to maintain price inserted prorationing under protective blanket of “conservation”’)}_, 126-27 ^{(‘East Texas: greatest oil field in all history tapped in 1930’)} John M. Blair The Control of Oil New York: Pantheon 1976

(_pp. 156-69: ’Until the late 1920s, the attitude of the majors toward conservation ranged from indifference to outright hostility.

… In 1926 Charles Evans Hughes, then counsel for the [American Petroleum Institute] and later Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, vigorously attacked the conservation movement …

By equating “conservation” with “economical use” he defined the problem away, his only recommendation being the now familiar one that agreements to curtail production be exempted from antitrust laws.

But this intransience was soon to give way to a recognition that the cause of conservation could be put to the use of market stabilization.

… Production in this country was in the process of expanding from 355.9 million barrels in 1918 to 732.4 million in 1923 and to 1,007.3 million in 1929.

Concerned over the “too rapid development” of oil fields, the American Petroleum Institute in early 1928 appointed a Committee on World Production and Consumption of Petroleum and Its Products, which on March 15, 1929, recommended a simple and drastic plan to restrict production:

“The committee recommended that 1928 production of crude oil in the United States should be considered as peak requirements for 1929 and subsequent years, proposing in effect that average production in future years be held to the 1928 level.”

This recommendation for the United States, it should be noted, was virtually identical to the first principle of the Achnacarry “As Is” Agreement adopted on September 17, 1928, by Exxon, Shell, and British Petroleum.

The API’s committee proposal was formally approved by the full Institute on March 29, 1929, and then accepted and put forward by the Federal Oil Conservation Board, only to be jettisoned by the Attorney-General.

… In notifying the American Petroleum Institute of the Attorney-General’s decision, Chairman Wilbur of the Oil Conservation Board on April 8, 1929, proposed a more roundabout approach to accomplish the same objective.

He suggested discussions “with State authorities of the three or four principal oil-producing states, particularly to learn if it is not possible for them to enter upon an interstate compact under the provision of the Constitution authorizing such compacts to which the Federal Government, through Congressional action, would be a party.”

In an ensuing report the Board developed this ingenious approach in greater detail, describing it with unusual candor the real reasons behind it, namely that foreign producers could not be expected to observe international agreements unless US production was also curtailed … the report went on to point out that the division of powers between the federal government and the states posed a problem:

“Under our Constitutional system the consummation of such agreements is a federal prerogative, but the enforcement of them is the State’s, whose police power is essential to such enforcement.”

The solution lay in the establishment of a new institution:

“An interstate compact would enable the states, through their interstate body, to assist the federal representatives in negotiating agreements which the compacting states could enforce as their municipal laws.”

… Commenting in 1946 on the connection between what the industry increasingly referred to as the “conservation” program in the United States and the cartel’s efforts to stabilize world production and prices, Paul H. Frankel observed,

“There can be little doubt that the American counterparts of this international set-up were ‘conservation’ and ‘proration’ as we knew them in the thirties. …

What mattered most, apart from the aspect of technology, where the sound argument seemed to support it, was the fact that only with a certain degree of production control could threw United States be fitted into the world-wide structure of the oil industry. Conservation was the missing link with had to be forged.”

… Resistance to market demand prorationing, however, was overwhelmed by the way in which the majors exploited the vast flood of oil coming from the newly discovered East Texas field.

The volume from this field, which quickly rose to about 1 million barrels a day or about one-third of the national requirements, was so “tremendous that it could singlehandedly defeat all attempts at regulation made elsewhere.”

… the majors adroitly used the occasion to force the acceptance of market demand prorationing. The circumstances were described by Karl Crowley as follows:

In order to restrict production the major companies first prevailed upon the then Governor of Texas to proclaim martial law in the East Texas oil field.

… Oil was selling then in the field for 50 cents a barrel, but on April 24, 1933, the majors dropped the posted price to ten cents a barrel as the first move to enlist the aid of independents themselves in securing the drastic proration laws Texas now has.

… Using the club of ruinous prices, the integrated companies went before the Texas Legislature and demanded that they be given the right to prorate oil according to their demands.

… they even introduced a bill which passed the House to create a new Commission to administer oil.

… They determined to speak their piece with prices and sandbag the Legislature into passing their so-called conservation bills.

… it was not until September 29, 1933 that the price ever again reached $1.00 a barrel.

During this time the major companies not only got enacted the proration law, but they bought tens of millions of barrels of oil at prices ranging from ten cents to 50 cents a barrel.

… Not only did the new law omit the earlier prohibitions against considering economic waste or reasonable market demand; it explicitly included production in excess of reasonable market demand in the definition of “prohibitable waste.”

Restricting production to maintain price had been inserted under the protective blanket of “conservation.” …

… signed into law by President Roosevelt on August 27, 1935, an Interstate Compact to Conserve Oil and Gas was established and thereafter has been regularly renewed by Congress, usually without debate.

Though lacking power to enforce its quotas, it disseminates information, holds meetings and discussions, and in other informal ways “promotes harmony among heterogeneous elements, and creates a favorable environment for understanding and collaboration.”

Its success is attested by the rare occasion when domestic oil has been produced in sufficient quantity to bring about a price reduction.

… The pivotal component of the control mechanism, market demand prorationing, is doubly objectionable in that it inflates both prices and costs.

Prices are inflated by restricting production to (or below) demand; costs are inflated by reducing the output of the more efficient, low-cost wells and keeping in operation inefficient, high-cost wells.

… It is, of course, difficult to measure the extent to which costs have been inflated by the artificial restrictions of prorationing.

… the marginal “stripper” wells (i.e., those producing less than ten barrels a day) have been completely exempt from prorationing. …

… Because it has served as an alternative to unitization, prorationing has had the effect of impeding the adoption of advanced recovery methods.

Unitization, in Zimmerman’s words, “is an irreducible sine qua non for secondary recovery.” Of twenty-eight oil-producing states, only Texas and New Mexico have no compulsory unitization statutes.

… According to an article in Oil Daily … ‘Unification of the easy fields has been done. Most of those that remain to be unitized represent such an insurmountable problem under existing rules that there is not enough incentive to try.’

In 1972, a vigorous drive was launched in Texas to secure enactment of a compulsory unitization measure.

… Supported by major oil companies, by the Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association, the governor, the Texas press, and leading liberal and conservative legislators, the bill … inexplicably died in the Senate, its proponents losing in a vote simply to bring it up to the Senate floor.’)

Doherty 1924 ^{(‘if we do not get our house in order, someone else will with dynamite/axe’)} Cities Service organization head Henry L. Doherty address to annual meeting of the National Petroleum Marketers’ Association “Oil conservation urged by Doherty” New York Times (20 November 1924): 38

(’Henry L. Doherty of New York, head of Cities Service organization, addressing the National Petroleum Marketers’ Association annual meeting here today said the whole industry is in a bad way and the public, not knowing enough about it to insist on its correction, “will pay for eternity,” the price of the industry’s wasted natural resources, its demoralization and its increasing competition.

… “Oil and gas belongs to the man who can capture it, and this means that we have absolutely no control over our production.

Discovery of an oil pool results in a frenzied effort to exhaust it as rapidly as possible, without regard to the market.

If we do not get our house in order sooner or later some one else will attempt to do it with a stick of dynamite or an axe.

… Oil producers are diseased with optimism. Any increase in drilling activities should be discouraged by everybody.”

… The object of Mr. Doherty’s address was to urge the industry to make such changes in the basic methods of producing crude oil that the raw product would not be dumped onto the market in an amount larger than the market’s ability to absorb it.

He urged that the “industry stimulate every oil company” to develop as fast as possible the utilization of oil and to secure the widest possible application for every use which is developed.

He asked that support, encouragement and assistance be given to inventors and manufacturers of oil-burning apparatus.’)

↩︎

Childers 1990_p. 371 ^{(‘$1.10/bbl in Oct`30 to $0.25 in Jan`31’)} William R. Childers “Origins of the Texas Railroad Commission’s power to control production of petroleum: Regulatory strategies in the 1920s” Journal of Policy History v2#4 (October 1990): 353-87

TSLAC 2011_pp. 5 ^{(‘by February 1931 full-fledged war’)}_, 6 ^{(Aug 18th: ‘by noon, all production in East Texas was temporarily shut down’)} “The oil wars” in Hazardous Business: Industry, regulation and the Texas Railroad Commission (Austin: Texas State Library and Archives Commission 2011): 9pp

(_p. 6: ’For the first time in history, the oil industry faced ruin from overproduction.

The price of crude stood at 6 cents a barrel (while the cost of production was about 80 cents a barrel).

The state itself faced budgetary disaster from declining royalties.

The Railroad Commission warned Governor Ross Sterling that “The time will come when our oil and gas reserves will be greatly depleted or exhausted,” and “if no cheap substitute is available, the calamity will be too serious to contemplate.”

Governor Sterling, himself a past president of Humble, proposed a voluntary plan that would limit production to 200,000 barrels a day, to be increased if market demand increased.

Small operators would receive special consideration, being allowed up 600 barrels a day.

But Sterling’s plan never got off the ground. Few people believed any longer that the industry could regulate itself on a voluntary basis. William Farish of Humble said, “No one in the industry today has sense enough or knows enough” to be self-regulating.

In July 1931, the Railroad Commission issued a proration order similar to Sterling’s plan.

… Private property rights were a treasured, even sacred tenet of American law.

The United States was the only country in the world in which the nation’s oil resources were in private hands.

Yet, oil had become a resource of vital interest not only to private business but to the public welfare.

East Texas production alone now supplied one-half of the US market demand and undersold Russian oil in Europe.

Unrestrained production in East Texas was not only depressing prices but ruining field pressure and threatening the loss of hundreds of thousands of barrels.

… On August 4, 1931, Governor William “Alfalfa Bill” Murray of Oklahoma declared martial law in the Oklahoma City and Seminole fields and declared that troops would remain there to control production and enforce law and order until prices rebounded to a dollar a barrel.

East Texas operators praised Murray’s action, saying, “the same fine character of leadership and courage has not been shown in the State of Texas.”

Thus goaded, on August 11, the Texas legislature passed the Anti-Market Demand Act, strengthening the Railroad Commission’s authority to prevent physical waste but continuing to forbid the setting of production limits based on market demand.

On the other hand, the act also limited the ability of operators to get court injunctions.

With this act, the legislature hoped that production in East Texas would drop by about 300,000 barrels a day, a total drop in state production of about 20 percent.

It was apparent to Sterling and others that production could not be controlled simply by passing a law and hoping that East Texas would comply.

On August 14, a group of 1200 producers met in Tyler and asked the governor to save them from themselves, unanimously voting on a measure requesting Sterling to declare martial law.

On August 17, they got their wish. Sterling declared that a “state of insurrection” existed in Gregg, Rusk, Smith, and Upshur counties.

He ordered 1100 soldiers of the Texas National Guard to Kilgore.

By noon the next day, all production in East Texas was temporarily shut down.

The area was now under military rule.’)

TSHA 1976 ^{(‘Rockefellers found it much easier to do business in Texas thru Humble after 1919’)} James A. Clark and Mark Odintz “Exxon Company, U.S.A.” in Handbook of Texas (1976; Austin: Texas State Historical Association 2015)

Hoover 6/12/30 ^{(Hoover: “oilmen desire to have legalized some control which is illegal, otherwise they would do it themselves”)} President Herbert Hoover to Secretary of the Interior Ray Wilbur (6 December 1930) cited in Kendrick A. Clements “Herbert Hoover and conservation, 1921-33” American Historical Review v89#1 (February 1984): 79n34

TSHA 1952 ^{(‘courts ruled Sterling had exceeded his authority by declaring martial law’)} “Sterling, Ross Shaw (1875–1949)” in Handbook of Texas (1952; Austin: Texas State Historical Association 2017)

AP 18/8/31 ^{(‘public will get plenty of gasoline but pay higher price, oil exec said’)} Associated Press “Oil price advances as Texas flow ends: About 1,000,000 barrels a day cut off with shutdowns in the Oklahoma field: Murray sees a solution: One company offers 25 cents above market level: Refineries to feel pinch” New York Times (19 August 1931): 1, 3

(’About two-fifths of the crude oil production of the United States had been cut off by the spectacular action of Governors Murray of Oklahoma and Sterling of Texas.

The shutdown of the great East Texas field, the largest in the country, was completed today under martial law …

… Predictions of Governor Sterling and oil leaders that prices were headed upward … found some degree of fulfillment today.

… The Kansas Public Service Commission was preparing for a hearing early next month to determine the extent of a possible shutdown in that state.

… under the new State proration law the Kansas output of about 102,000 barrels daily could be cut in half.

“We don’t want producers to believe that because of the Texas and Oklahoma shutdowns they can come to Kansas and open up new production,” Thurman Hill, a member of the commission, said.

… There is not likelihood that the public will not be able to get plenty of gasoline, but will have to pay a higher price, an executive said yesterday.’)

↩︎

TSLAC 2011_p. 7 ^{(‘1932: trends stabilize’)} “The oil wars” in Hazardous Business: Industry, regulation and the Texas Railroad Commission (Austin: Texas State Library and Archives Commission 2011): 9pp

Blair 1976_p. 161 ^{(Market Demand Act)} John M. Blair The Control of Oil New York: Pantheon 1976

Boychuk 2023d_nn. 40, 52 ^{(‘Fourth Order of society is small international class of violent & lawless imperialists, together w/ their assorted compradors + apologists, should be added as an international class to Adam Smith’s great, original constituent orders of every civilized society: rentiers, wage-earners, capitalists, & the imperialists who feed upon them amidst international lawlessness’)} Regan Boychuk “Canada is an American protectorate & Alberta is an imperial bezzle: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part five” York University Capital-as-Power blog (22 July 2023)↩︎

TSLAC 2011_p. 8 ^{(FDR & sabotage)} “The oil wars” in Hazardous Business: Industry, regulation and the Texas Railroad Commission (Austin: Texas State Library and Archives Commission 2011): 9pp

Lovejoy & Homan 1967_pp. 36-38 ^{(‘generous bill appeared to be on way to passage in fall`32, but after FDR’s election, industry withdrew support’)} Wallace F. Lovejoy and Paul T. Homan Economic Aspects of Oil Conservation Regulation Baltimore: John Hopkins University for Resources for the Future 1967

(_pp. 36-38: ’During 1932 much attention was given to the preparation of a proposed federal statute that would authorize an interstate compact and that provided for a joint-federal-state conservation board to promote and supervise the measures desired for stabilization and conservation purpose. …

… Supported by much of the industry and under sympathetic consideration by the federal administration and Congressional committees, the bill appeared to be on its way to passage in the fall of 1932.

After the election in November, however, for reasons then unknown to the committee (and still obscure), both the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) withdrew their support.

Since it considered the case hopeless without industry support, the committee ceased its activities … for two years until the end of 1934.

As its last official act, the committee distributed copies of a “Uniform Act for Oil and Gas Conservation and Interstate Compact,” designed for state adoption as a correlative of the proposed federal law.

The draft law contained a provision relating the curtailment of production to when prices fell below the average cost of production.

The cost formula was geared to the presumed necessities of “wells of settled production” to prevent premature abandonment.’)

↩︎

Blair 1976_pp. 56 ^{(`32 Heads of Agreement for Distribution)</sup><sub>, 160-61</sub> <sup>(Spring`34: oil 10 cents/bbl)}_, 56 ^{(`34 Draft Memorandum of Principles)</sup><sub>, 164</sub> <sup>(`35 “Hot Oil” Act)} John M. Blair The Control of Oil New York: Pantheon 1976

TSLAC 2011_p. 9 ^{(Jan`35: ’US Supreme Court declared hot oil provision of FDR’s New Deal legislation unconstitutional; Feb`35: Connally Hot Oil Act gave fed gov power to enforce directives of Texas Railroad Commission; state governors & oil execs formed Interstate Oil Compact to stabilize prices & minimal federal interference. Congress approved existence of IOC in August 1935 & petroleum industry still governed by those 1935 laws’)} “The oil wars” in Hazardous Business: Industry, regulation and the Texas Railroad Commission (Austin: Texas State Library and Archives Commission 2011): 9pp

(_p. 9: ’In January 1935, the progress that had been made was almost undone when the US Supreme Court declared the hot oil provision of the NIRA unconstitutional.

With the end of federal penalties, it looked as if unrestrained production would once again become the norm in East Texas.

To prevent this, Senator Tom Connally asked the Department of Interior to draft a new hot oil bill that would pass constitutional muster.

The bill defined illegal petroleum as that produced or withdrawn from storage in defiance of state allowables and prohibited its shipment across state or national lines.

The Connally Hot Oil Act, passed in February 1935, gave the federal government the power to enforce the directives of the Texas Railroad Commission in interstate commerce.

Still to be determined was a means of enabling all of the oil-producing states to coordinate production.

State governors and oil company executives formed the Interstate Oil Compact (IOC).

The IOC aimed to stabilize the industry in the name of a steady supply of oil, predictable prices, and minimal federal interference.

Each state would control its own production.

Members of the IOC would have monthly meetings to review predictions of demand and establish production totals.

Congress approved the existence of the IOC in August 1935.

… The acceptance of the Connally Hot Oil Act and the IOC marked the end of the oil wars and the beginning of the era of regulation.

The state-based controls of the IOC were reinforced by the demands of World War II. Aside from offshore regulations and environmental laws, the petroleum industry continues to be governed by the laws set down in 1935.

In a testimony to the effectiveness of sane regulation, the East Texas Field, which was estimated to produce about a billion barrels of oil under the free-for-all conditions of the oil wars, was found to have more than five billion barrels of recoverable oil under regulated conditions.’)

Ely 1938_pp. 1215-16 ^{(16 Feb`35: ‘Texas, Oklahoma, California, Kansas, New Mexico, Colorado & Illinois entered into oil conservation compact’)}_, 1216 ^{(‘interstate body is w/o federal participation & states are not committed to enforcing quotas’)} Northcutt Ely “The conservation of oil” Harvard Law Review v51#7 (May 1938): 1209-44

(_pp. 1215-16: ’On February 16, 1935, the states of Texas, Oklahoma, California, Kansas, New Mexico, Colorado and Illinois entered into an oil conservation compact …

The Compact was ratified by all but California.

The contemplated uniform conservation have never been formulated.’)

(_p. 1216: ’The Compact is the partial fulfillment of the recommendation in the fifth Report of the Federal Oil Conservation Board (1932) …

However, as now constituted … the interstate body is without federal participation, and the states are not committed to enforcing quotas.

The compacting states were unwilling to admit the Federal Government into participation.

In this respect the Compact veers far in one direction as the Code did in the other.

However, in practice, the informal relations of the two groups are very good.’)

↩︎

Collier & Horowitz 1976_p. 207 ^{(Jul-Aug`35: Nelson Rockefeller in Europe)} Peter Collier and David Horowitz The Rockefellers: An American dynasty 1976; New York: Signet 1977

Schultz 1960_p. 1 ^{(Social Credit swept to power in Aug`35 on promise of equivalent of $500/month/Albertan)} Harold J. Schultz “The Social Credit back-benchers’ revolt, 1937” Canadian Historical Review v41#1 (March 1960): 1-18↩︎

AIMME 1938_pp. 1-2 ^{(‘in last decade, mechanism for producing oil has changed from automatic to designed procedure called proration’)}_, 3 ^{(‘ultimate recovery of oil + flowing life of oil fields were increased hence proration became firmly entrenched’)} Joseph E. Pogue “An equilibrium theory of proration” American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers Technical Publication #904 (February 1938): 8pp

(_pp. 1-2: ’If the development of the petroleum industry in the United States is examined from its inception in 1859 down to the present, it will be found that, beginning about 11 years ago, a new mechanism for regulating the production of crude petroleum made its appearance.

Prior to this recent period, the production of this raw material was determined by competitive forces operating without outside restraints.

At present the output of crude oil is subjected to supervision by regulatory bodies in most of the oil-producing states, which impose upon the operators certain conditions having to do with the manner and rates of production.

Thus, in the space of a decade, the mechanism for producing crude oil has changed from an automatic to a designed procedure called proration.

… Proration developed in response to a serious dislocation between supply and demand.

… With the perfection of an extraordinary range of new technology and the maturing of the rate of growth in the demand factor, however, the aggregate open-flow capacity of our oil wells expanded beyond the requirements of the market in a manner and to a degree that appeared to be a permanent new relationship.

… Thus the Rule of Capture, which had heretofore dictated capacity production—except in a few instances, when unit operation was feasible—had become untenable and a modifying influence made its appearance.

Proration, therefore, had its inception as an economic corrective to the Rule of Capture and its acceptance was motivated by the need for a new stabilizing influence.

Hence proration came on the scene in response to an economic motive.

Accordingly it may be said that proration got under way as a stabilization influence in answer to a need for a mechanism less drastic and quicker acting than price.’)

(_p. 3: ’Once initiated as a working procedure in loci of overproduction, proration generated the urge and created the “need” for its wider and more permanent establishment.

… After proration reached a condition of wide application and a broad body of experience developed, it became apparent to all concerned that the ultimate recovery of oil and the flowing life of oil fields were increased by virtue of operating wells at reduced capacity; hence proration became firmly entrenched as a conservation measure of importance.’)

Boychuk 2022c_n. 10 ^{(‘Dr.  Boomer’s Oct`45 ’heart attack’ suggests something >efficiency driving Rockefeller machine’)} Regan Boychuk “Who would do this to themselves? Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part three” York University Capital-as-Power blog (13 December 2022)

Gitelman 1988_pp. 14-15 ^{(JDR Jr: “It is a great principle”)} Howard M. Gitelman Legacy of the Ludlow Massacre: A chapter in American industrial relations Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia 1988

Smith 1776_{bk3, ch4, v1, p. 437} ^{(‘masters of mankind’s vile maxim’)} Adam Smith An Inquiry into the Causes of the Wealth of Nations 5^th edn. (ed.) Edwin Canaan (1789; Chicago: University of Chicago 1976

(_{bk3, ch4, v1, p. 437}: ’But what all the violence of the feudal institutions could never have effected, the silent and insensible operation of foreign commerce and manufactures gradually brought about.

These gradually furnished the great proprietors with something for which they could exchange the whole surplus produce of their lands, and which they could consume themselves without sharing it either with tenants or retainers.

All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.

As soon, therefore, as they could find a method of consuming the whole value of their rents themselves, they had no disposition to share them with any other persons.

… thus, for the gratification of the most childish, the meanest and the most sordid of all vanities, they gradually bartered their whole power and authority.’)

↩︎

Hays 1959 ^{(‘The conservation movement in the Progressive Era sheds light on the entire political structure, the types of human interaction, perspective and goals peculiar to the different portions of that structure, and the rival systems of decision-making which have developed in modern society’)} Samuel P. Hays Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The progressive conservation movement, 1890-1920 Cambridge: Harvard University 1959

Kolko 1963 ^{(‘only Thorstein Veblen, of all the American intellectuals of the Progressive Era, understood the main drift of American power relations in the period preceding the First World War. Veblen captured the indispensable reality of the domination of business over American politics, ethics, and the key institutions of society’)} Gabriel Kolko The Triumph of Conservatism: A reinterpretation of American history, 1900-1916 New York: Free Press 1963

Kaufman 2003_p. 31 ^{(‘19th century employment was “master & servant” relationship’)} Bruce E. Kaufman “Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc.: Its history and significance” in Kaufman, Richard A. Beaumont and Roy B. Helfgott (eds.) Industrial Relations to Human Resources and Beyond: The evolving process of employee relations management (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe 2003): 31-112

(_p. 31: ’The twentieth century witnessed many revolutions, but surely one of the most important and far-reaching took place in the working conditions of work and the management of labor.

At the beginning of the century, America was still in the early phase of transition from an agrarian to an industrial economy.

For the wage-earning labor force, work hours often stretched to twelve a day, pay for many workers was barely enough to support a family at a subsistence level, and personal injury, termination without notice, and rough and insensitive treatment were everyday perils.

In the common law of the period, the employment relationship was governed by the doctrine of “master and servant,” a phrase that accurately captures both the spirit and practice of labor management at most companies of the period.’)

Blair 1976_p. 127 ^{(‘Supreme Court’s order badly flawed, leaving dominant ownership w/ Rockefellers’)} John M. Blair The Control of Oil New York: Pantheon 1976

(_p. 127: ’When in 1911 the Supreme Court dissolved the [Standard Oil] trust, the way was opened for the subsequent growth of other major companies. .…

Nonetheless, the Court’s order was badly flawed in one respect: the assets of the holding company were distributed back to its own shareholders—assets consisting of the stock of the operating companies, which were spread over production, transportation, refining, and marketing.

The result of leaving the ownership of the operating companies in the hands of those who had owned the old parent corporation was of course to leave the dominant ownership with the Rockefeller interests.

After an investigation eleven years later, the Federal Trade Commission noted:

“There is, as is generally known, an interlocking stock ownership in the different organizations [of the Standard Oil group] which has perpetuated the very monopolistic control which the courts sought to terminate.”

Not long after the old Standard Oil “Trust” had been broken up in 1911, the newly divided operating companies resumed their growth by merger.’)

Reksulak et al. 2015_p. 64 ^{(’Rockefeller Sr worth} _~^{$4.5 billion before breakup of Standard Oil in 1910, >$13 billion by 1914’)} Michael Reksulak, William F. Shughart II, Robert D. Tollison and Atin Basuchoudhary “Titan agonistes: The wealth effects of the Standard Oil (N.J.) case” Antitrust Law and Economics v21 (2015): 63-84

(_p. 64: ‘The dissolution of Standard Oil may or may not have increased consumers’ surplus, but it certainly did not adversely affect the wealth of its principal owner.

At the beginning of 1911, Rockefeller’s net worth was approximately $300 million (in then-current dollars).

By the end of 1913, he was worth three times that much, or around $900 million (more than $13 billion in [2015] dollars).’)

↩︎

Leccese 2017_p. 245 ^{(‘progressive reform inadvertently aided rise of big business by teaching corp’s importance of favorable public images’)} Stephen R. Leccese “John D. Rockefeller, Standard Oil, and the rise of corporate public relations in Progressive America, 1902-1908” Journal of the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era v16#3 (July 2017): 245-63

(_p. 245: ’the article views … standard corporate practices of the early Progressive Era, when large businesses had only begun to promote favorable public images.

It argues that progressive reform inadvertently aided the rise of big business by teaching corporations the importance of promoting favorable public images.

This wider context reveals that Standard Oil’s public relations response, if unsuccessful, was not as aloof as others have argued.

In fact, the company made a concerted effort to change public opinion about its business practices.’)

Carey 1995_p. 18 ^{(’20th century characterized by 3 developments: growth of democracy, growth of corp power & growth of corp propaganda to protect corp power against democracy’)} Alex Carey Taking the Risk Out of Democracy: Corporate propaganda versus freedom and liberty (ed.) Andrew Lohrey (1995; Urbana: University of Illinois 1997)

Turchin 2023_pp.122-23 ^{(Bankers’ Magazine: “Government are not yet entirely controlled by these interests b/c the business organization has not reached full perfection”)} Peter Turchin End Times: Elites, counter-elites, and the path of political disintegration New York: Penguin 2023

(_pp. 122-23: ’Toward the end of the Gilded Age, the idea that unrestricted competition was injurious to all players became expressed more and more frequently by business leaders, including such titans as John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan.

Their dislike of the resulting disorder and their pursuit of predictability resulted in the Great Merger Movement of 1895-1904. …

Their main benefits, however, were not increased economic efficiency but in increasing the political power of business.

Following the consolidation of iron and steel manufactories in 1901, the editors of The Bankers’ Magazine commented on it with unusual candor:

“When business men were single units, each working out his own success regardless of others in desperate competition, the men who controlled the political organizations were supreme.

They dictated laws and employed the proceeds of taxation in building up the power of their organization.

But as the business of the country has learned the secret of combination, it is gradually subverting the power of the politician and rendering him subservient to its purposes.

More and more the legislatures and the executive powers of the Government were compelled to listen to the demands of organized business interests.

That they are not entirely controlled by these interests is due to the fact that the business organization has not reached full perfection.

The recent consolidation of the iron and steel industries is an indication of the concentration of power that is possible.

Every form of business is capable of similar consolidation, and if other industries imitate the example of that concerned with iron and steel, it is easy to see that eventually the government of a country where the productive forces are all mustered and drilled under the control of a few leaders, must become the mere tool of these forces.”’)

Rockefeller 1941_p. 99 ^{(“monopoly control & financial gain through pseudo-legal manipulations”)} David Rockefeller Unused Resources and Economic Waste Chicago: University of Chicago [PhD thesis] 1941

Provost & Kennard 2023 ^{(‘as European empires crumbled, power structures that had dominated the world for centuries were up for renegotiation. Yet instead of a rebirth for democracy, what emerged was a silent coup – namely, the unstoppable rise of global corporate power. Exposing the origins of this epic power grab as well as its present-day consequences, Silent Coup is the result of two investigative journalist’s reports from 30 countries around the world’)} Claire Provost and Matt Kennard Silent Coup: How corporations overthrew democracy London: Bloomsbury Academic 2023

Boychuk 2022x_pp. 4-10 ^{(backgrounder on the Rockefellers’ war against conservation)} Regan Boychuk “They’ll Conjure Enough Collateral to Kill Us All: A dynamic theory of conservation to thwart the Rockefeller Bezzle, the Bush Doctrine & climate change: Bad loans rob future taxpayers by growing environmental debt, but a burdenless tax on resource rent could stop looting & still fully-fund oilfield cleanup, First Nations reparations & a just transition within 1.5°C carbon budget” Research proposal_pp. 1-3 + backgrounder_pp. 4-10 + excerpted bibliography_pp. 12ff (May 2022): 395pp↩︎

Olien & Olien 1993_pp. 47-49 ^{(‘Requa: British moving to acquire overseas oil, seemed bent on control of world oil – national crisis of 1st magnitude’; Requa’s stress on need for foreign reserves readily taken up by ‘conservationists’ in early `20s’)}_{, 49, 51-52} ^{(‘industry almost always dismissed danger of “oil famine”, but that did not mean oilmen couldn’t use elements of conservationist discourse to advance their own business strategies’)}_, 55 ^{(’Teagle didn’t believe America running out of oil, but premise nonetheless served Standard’s interests’)} Diana Davids Olien and Roger M. Olien “Running out of oil: Discourse and public policy, 1909-1929” Business and Economic History v22#2 (Winter 1993): 36-66

(_pp. 47-49: ’there was an alternative policy option [to genuine oil conservation]: that the United States provide for its petroleum needs by using the oil reserves of other countries.

The leading advocate of this position was California businessman and mining engineer Mark L. Requa.

A friend of Interior Secretary Franklin K. Lane and of Herbert Hoover, Requa was a leader in … California’s … Independent Oil Producers Agency. …

… The United States, warned Requa, was doing nothing to safeguard access to … foreign … reserves.

By contrast, the British were moving to acquire overseas oil; indeed, they seemed bent on control of world oil.

This, as Requa saw it, meant that the United States had been “officially put upon notice”; “In the exhaustion of its oil lands and with no assured sources of domestic supply in sight, the United States is confronted with a national crisis of the first magnitude.” …

… Requa had a far wider opportunity to air his opinions when he was appointed director of the Oil Division of the wartime Fuel Administration in January 1918.

In his division’s report the following year, he repeated his warning of impending crisis and cry for reserves in foreign lands.

By this time he wanted government action; efforts by US oilmen to obtain oil overseas should have “most hearty and sympathetic support by official Washington.”

Requa’s stress on the need for foreign reserves was readily taken up by George Otis Smith and Van H. Manning as part of their conservation arguments in the early twenties.’)

(_{pp. 49, 51-52}: ’from time to time, the Oil and Gas Journal published what “practical oil men”—i.e., industry participants—said, and those quoted almost always dismissed the danger of “oil famine.” …

… That did not mean that oilmen could not use elements of conservationist discourse to advance their own business strategies.

In particular, after 1918 some adapted Mark Requa’s arguments for meeting the threat of looming oil shortage by acquiring foreign reserves, turning it into a demand that the United States government help American oilmen acquire reserves overseas.

Their argument for foreign reserves tied conservationist apprehensions to nationalist rivalry and antimonopoly sentiment by raising the alarm that, if American oil men did not receive government support, the British would grab foreign reserves and dominate world oil. …

Among the oilmen most prominent in arguing for the need for foreign reserves and government support in getting them were Jersey Standard executives A.C. Bedford and Walter C. Teagle.

Only two months after Armistice, the Oil and Gas Journal reported that both felt it vital to conserve American oil while maintaining control of foreign markets—a position that required reserves abroad [OGJ, January 24, 1919, p. 54].

In 1920, Bedford told the Journal that the country had been “caught napping” in the matter of safeguarding future supplies of oil; while the United States had been harassing its oilmen with investigations, the British had been helping their nationals pick up oil overseas. …

Echoing Mark Requa, [Bedford] concluded, “I particularly hope that public opinion will demand cooperative effort [of government and business] looking to the extension of our holdings of oil lest we be caught in the position of a petitioner for oil in foreign markets.”

Later the same year, Teagle told the API … that it was imperative to develop oil resources in foreign lands.

If this sounded like Requa, that was not surprising. Teagle was a friend of Requa and, while serving on the National Petroleum War Service Committee, shared Requa’s Fuel Administration office. …

… foreign sources would be necessary. [Teagle’s] company felt it could no longer depend on domestic wildcatters for its future supply; it was now “interested in every producing area, no matter in what country it is situated” …

Both the editors of the Oil and Gas Journal and API president Thomas A. O’Donnell echoed the Jersey executives’ call for foreign reserves.

In frequent editorials the Journal warned of the British oil menace.’)

(_p. 55: ’if, as his most recent biographers indicate, Walter Teagle did not believe that America was running out of oil, using conservationist discourse emerging from that premise nonetheless served his company’s interests …

… oilmen did win government support for their drive to acquire overseas reserves’)

Spaulding 1993_pp. 68-69 ^{(“Rockefeller Sr. had absolutely no idea what scientific medicine was nor did he care”)}_, 70 ^{(‘from outset in 1903, Rockefeller’s General Education Board was prevented by law from supporting endeavors in countries such as Canada’)}_, 71 ^{(‘$50M of Standard Oil shares used to establish Rockefeller Foundation in 1913, allowing countries like Canada to become beneficiaries’),} ₇₂ ^{(‘Rockefeller Foundation president was cousin of Vincent Massey’),} _73-75 ^{(‘Not until 1913, w/ Rockefeller Foundation, could he donate monies anywhere else in the world; Mackenzie King made representations to his friend, JDR Jr. & helped persuade senior Rockefeller to initiate benefactions’)} William B. Spaulding “Why Rockefeller supported medical education in Canada: The William Lyon Mackenzie King connection” Canadian Bulletin of Medical History v10#1 (Spring 1993): 67-76

(_pp. 68-69: ’[Rockefeller’s key philanthropic & business adviser Frederick Taylor] Gates realized that Rockefeller [Sr.] was supporting Baptist causes with no master plan to guide the donations.

To correct this, Gates introduced his “principles of scientific giving” which Rockefeller used as a guide to charitable support.

… One must agree with Howard S. Berliner, who pointed out, on the basis of the scant evidence available, that Rockefeller “had absolutely no idea what scientific medicine was nor did he care.”’)

(_p. 70: ’In 1903, the New York State legislature authorized the incorporation of Rockefeller’s General Education Board, limiting its mandate to the distribution of funds to educational and research organizations within the United States.

From the outset the Board was prevented by law from supporting endeavors in countries such as Canada.

… John D. Rockefeller, Jr. made a lifelong, full-time career of managing the disposition of the charitable funds donated by his father.

After an apprenticeship with Frederick Gates, the son became convinced that Gates’s plan to support medicine was worthy of strong support.

The two worked harmoniously together, the son being the faithful intermediary between the salesman Gates and the senior Rockefeller.

John D., Jr., who served on the General Education Board from its first days, helped it become highly influential in supporting first general education, and then medical education and research.

Deeply trusted by his revered father, whom he consulted about all major decisions, John D., Jr. soon became the major Rockefeller voice in determining how the family millions should be used to best effect.

The elder Rockefeller, who had retired from active business in the 1890s, was in his sixties when his son took the helm.’)

(_p. 71: ’In 1913 Rockefeller used more of his fortune, $50 million worth of Standard Oil shares, to establish the Rockefeller Foundation.

This important step expanded the scope of support beyond the limits of the activities of the General Education Board which were confined to the United States by statute.

The new funds were used largely to support preventive medicine and medical education on a world-wide scale.

The establishment of the Foundation allowed countries like Canada to become beneficiaries.’)

(_p. 72: ’George Vincent, president of the Rockefeller Foundation, actually had family links with Canada.

He was a cousin of Vincent Massey, Canada’s first native-born Governor-General; Massey’s mother was the half-sister of Vincent’s father, who had visited the Massey family in Toronto in the 1890s.

These Canadian connections of key members of the Rockefeller Foundation did not provide sufficient reason for the Rockefellers to extend their support of medical education to include Canada.’)

(_pp. 73-75: ’Not until 1913, when John D., Sr. created his Rockefeller Foundation, could he donate monies anywhere else in the world.

So far it is unclear why, in 1919, Rockefeller Sr. decided to support

Canadian medical education. …

… In 1919 Mackenzie King made representations to his friend, John D., Jr., on behalf of Canadian educational authorities.

The approach helped persuade the senior Rockefeller to initiate benefactions world-wide. In December 1919 John D., Sr. gave further securities to the Rockefeller Foundation stating that

“I am greatly interested in the work which is being done throughout the world in combating disease through the improvement of medical education, public health administration and scientific research.

… My attention has been recently called to the needs of some of the medical schools in Canada.

… The Canadian people are our near neighbours. They are bound to us by ties of race, language, and international friendship; …

For these reasons, if your Board should see fit to use any part of this gift in promoting medical education in Canada, such action would meet with my cordial approval.”

Soon the medical schools of Canada were notified that approximately $5 million would be made available for use in Canada.’)

Watts 1997_p. xiii ^{(‘tropical medicine was an “instrument of empire” intended to enable the white “races” to exploit all areas of the globe’)} Sheldon Watts Epidemics and History: Disease, power and imperialism New Haven: Yale University 1997

(_p. xiii: ’The transition years (1880s-1930s) that led to the full medicalization of the West (lay people’s acceptance of medical doctors as their first line of defense against disease) coincided with the great age of European and North American imperialism; the two phenomena were not unrelated.

Coming out of the scramble for Africa, the scramble for China, and the conquest of Spain’s old empire in the Caribbean and Pacific by the USA was the new discipline of Tropical Medicine.

From its very onset tropical medicine was thus an “instrument of empire” intended to enable the white “races” to live in, or at the very least to exploit, all areas of the globe.

Justifying the new role were the “truths” concocted by Herbert Spencer and later incorporated into popularizations of Charles Darwin’s seminal works on evolution.

As generally understood, the Social Darwinistic message was that Europeans were at the very summit of the evolutionary chain and that they should, by right, dominate all other humankind.’)

↩︎

CP 18/7/21 ^{(‘AB First Nations communities had some of highest TB rates ever recorded in a human population, but in residential schools, they were astronomical’)} Jeremy Appel “Researchers say that TB at residential schools was no accident” Canadian Press (18 July 2021)

(’According to the Canadian Public Health Association, TB death rates in First Nations communities in the 1930s and `40s were 700 per 100,000, some of the highest ever recorded in a human population.

But in residential schools, they were astronomical — 8,000 per 100,000 children.’)

Boychuk 2023d_nn. 19-22 ^{(Harold Cardinal: “Residential schools represented only one element of a continuing campaign by Europeans in the ‘New World’ to destroy its original inhabitants. In this sense, the horrors experienced by Indian Nations were no less than those experienced by others”)} Regan Boychuk “Canada is an American protectorate & Alberta is an imperial bezzle: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part five” York University Capital-as-Power blog (22 July 2023)

Bryce 1907_p. 18 ^{(’of 1537 pupils, nearly 25% are dead & almost invariable cause of death given is tuberculosis’)} Indian Department Chief Medical Officer Dr. Peter H. Bryce “Report Of The Indian Schools Of Manitoba And The Northwest Territories” Claims and Historical Research Centre (June 1907): 21pp

(_p. 18: ‘of a total of 1537 pupils reported upon nearly 25 per cent are dead, of one school with an absolutely accurate statement, 69 per cent of ex-pupils are dead, and that everywhere the almost invariable cause of death given is tuberculosis.’)

Hay, Blackstock & Kirlew 2020_p. E224 ^{(Nov`07: “Schools Aid White Plague: Startling Death Rolls Revealed Among Indians: Absolute Inattention to the Bare Necessities of Health”)} Travis Hay, Cindy Blackstock and Michael Kirlew “Dr. Peter Bryce (1853–1932): Whistleblower on residential schools” Canadian Medical Association Journal v109#9 (2 March 2020): E223-24

(’Peter Hendersen Bryce became the first Chief Medical Officer of the Department of the Interior in 1904.

This was 20 years after Sir John A. MacDonald made First Nations children official wards of the state with an 1884 amendment to the Indian Act that mandated residential and day school attendance as compulsory for Indian children who had attained the age of seven years.

Bryce was therefore responsible for the health of Indigenous children in the schools.

… In 1907, Bryce released a report drawing attention to the fact that, according to his surveys, roughly one-quarter of all Indigenous children attending residential schools had died from tuberculosis …

Bryce’s report named poor ventilation and poor standards of care from school officials as the primary cause of deaths as opposed to the racial susceptibility hypothesis rather popular at the time. Put simply, Bryce

“exposed the genocidal practices of government-sanctioned residential schools, where healthy Indigenous children were purposefully exposed to children infected with TB, spreading the disease through the school population.”

Importantly, it was not only the Canadian government but the broader population that learned of Bryce’s report; for example, on Nov.  15, 1907, The Evening Citizen (an earlier edition of the The Ottawa Citizen) ran a front­page story with the headline

Schools Aid White Plague
Startling Death Rolls Revealed Among Indians
Absolute Inattention To The Bare Necessities of Health

… Importantly, Bryce noted that the health care funding granted to citizens in Ottawa alone was about three times higher than that allocated to First Nations people in all of Canada.

However, when Duncan Campbell Scott became Deputy Superintendent General of Indian Affairs in 1913, he informed Bryce that his annual medical reports on tuberculosis in residential schools were no longer necessary …

… Bryce’s funding for research was thereafter cut and his presentations at academic conferences heavily interfered with by Scott.

Not the type to be silenced, Bryce arranged for a publisher (James Hope and Sons Limited) to print a short pamphlet that was sold for 35 cents a copy.

It was titled The Story of a National Crime …

… although Bryce’s words do betray a slight self-interest, he lamented the indifference of Canadians to the medical wellness of First Nations children and underscored the extent to which the mass apprehension of Indigenous children was not merely a cultural but a biological genocide.

He also risked his professional career to do so.

… Peter Hendersen Bryce stands as a hallmark of the moral conviction and courage it requires to enact the Hippocratic Oath and to transition reconciliation from an ideology to a reality.

By beckoning back to the example of Dr. Peter Hendersen Bryce, we mean to sound another alarm and call on historians of medicine, legal advocates and medical practitioners across Canada to denounce this decision of the Liberal government and to demand the best for First Nations children.

We must speak in concert to stop Canada from making the same mistake twice.’)

Bryce 1918_pp. 8-13 ^{(1918 estimates of First Nations victims; ‘Health Dept has no power over health of Indians, purposely left out Act establishing Dept’)} Indian Department Chief Medical Officer Dr. Peter H. Bryce “The Conservation of the Man Power of the Indian Population of Canada” memorandum to federal minister of health N.W. Rowell (winter 1918) cited in The Story of a National Crime: A record of the health conditions of the Indians of Canada from 1904 to 1921 (Ottawa: James Hope & Sons 1922): 8-13

(_pp. 8-13: ’From the statistics given in the “Man Power” pamphlet it was made plain that instead of the normal increase in the Indian population being 1.5 per cent per annum as given for the white population, there had been between 1904 and 1917 an actual decrease in the Indian population in the age period over twenty years of 1,639 persons whereas a normal increase would have added 20,000 population in the 13 years.

The comparisons showed that the loss was almost wholly due to a high death rate since, though incomplete, the Indian birth rate was 27 per thousand or higher than the average for the whole white population.

The memorandum states, “As the Indian people are an unusually strong native race, their children at birth are large and sturdy, and under good sanitary conditions have a low mortality. …

Naturally it is asked: Why this decrease should have taken place?

In 1906 the report of the Chief Medical Officer shows … death rates in several large bands were 81.8, 82.6, and in a third 86.4 per thousand; while the ordinary death rate for 115,000 in the city of Hamilton was 10.6 in 1921. …

The memorandum prepared by the writer in 1918 further showed that the city of Hamilton with a population had reduced the death rate from tuberculosis in the same period, from 1904 to 1917, by nearly 75 per cent, having in 1916 actually only 68 deaths.

The memorandum further states: “If a similar method had been introduced amongst the bands on the health-giving uplands of Alberta, much might have been done to prevent a splendid race of warriors as the Blackfeet from … an actual loss of 40 per cent” …

Such then is the situation made known to the Hon. N.W. Rowell, who applied to the writer in 1918 to supply him with such facts and arguments as would support the Bill he proposed to introduce into Parliament for the creation of a Federal Department of Health.

… the clause appeared in the First Reading in Parliament. But something then happened: What occult influences came into action may be imagined, when the Second Reading of the Bill took place with this clause regarding the Indian Medical Services omitted. …

… statement of the Hon. A. Meighen, Minister of the Interior and now Prime Minister.

On June 8^th, 1920, the estimates of the Indian Department were under consideration in Parliament. Page 3275 of Hansard …

… Mr. Meighen, “The Health Department has no power to take over the matter of the health of the Indians. That is not included in the Act establishing the department. It was purposely left out of the act. …”

Mr. Beland, “Is tuberculosis increasing or decreasing amongst the Indians?”

Mr. Meighen, “I am afraid I cannot give a very encouraging answer to the question. We are not convinced that it is increasing, but it is not decreasing.”

… Thus we find a sum of only $10,000 has been annually placed in the estimates of control tuberculosis amongst 105,000 Indians scattered over Canada in over 300 bands, while the City of Ottawa, with about the same population and having three general hospitals spent thereon $342,860.54 in 1919 of which $33,364.70 is devoted to tuberculosis patients alone.’)

Bryce 1922_p. 15 ^{(‘story should’ve been written years ago, but free to speak today’)} Indian Department Chief Medical Officer Dr. Peter H. Bryce The Story of a National Crime: A record of the health conditions of the Indians of Canada from 1904 to 1921 Ottawa: James Hope & Sons 1922

(_p. 15: ’This story should have been written years ago and then given to the public; but in my oath of office as a Civil Servant swore that “without authority on that behalf, I shall not disclose or make known any matter or thing which comes to my knowledge by reason of my employment as Chief Medical Inspector of Indian Affairs.”

… To my disappointment the position of Deputy Minister of Health to which I had a right to aspire after twenty-two years as Chief Medical Officer of Ontario, and fifteen years as Chief Medical Officer of Immigration and Indian Affairs was given to another, wholly outside the Federal Civil Service and in violation of the principle of promotion, which was supposed to prevail when the patronage system was to be done away with. …

… Today I am free to speak, having been retired from the Civil Service and so am in a position to write the sequel to the story.’)

↩︎

Mitchell 2012 ^{(‘father of fracking favors more gov regulation “B/c if they don’t do it right there could be trouble”’)} Fracking pioneer George Mitchell in Christopher Helman “Billionaire father of fracking says government should step up regulation” Forbes (19 July 2012)

(’Going to see George Phydias Mitchell feels kind of like a pilgrimage. It was Mitchell who … pioneered the oil and gas drilling techniques now known as “fracking.”

So it was surprising to hear Mitchell say yesterday that he is in favor of more government regulation of fracking. “The administration is trying to tighten up controls,” he told me.

“I think it’s a good idea. They should have very strict controls. The Department of Energy should do it.”

… So why does Mitchell think fracking needs to be controlled?

“Because if they don’t do it right there could be trouble,” he says. There’s no excuse not to get it right.

“There are good techniques to make it safe that should be followed properly,” he says. But, the smaller, independent drillers, “are wild.”

“It’s tough to control these independents. If they do something wrong and dangerous, they should punish them,” Mitchell says.

This should be grist for the anti-fracking forces who are paranoid that the process threatens groundwater.

Mitchell assures me that most drillers are entirely responsible in their drilling and fracking activities. All of them, he says, “know how to set up a proper well and do the proper technology.”

Mitchell dismisses any concern that the costs to drillers of abiding by a barrage of fracking regulations would be egregious.

After all, any extra costs associated with best practices—assuming all producers follow them—would be passed on in the price of natural gas.’)

Urquhart 2018 ^{(excellent study includes insightful critique of the curious Pembina Institute}) University of Alberta emeritus professor of political science Ian Urquhart Costly Fix: Power, politics, and nature in the tar sands North York: University of Toronto 2018

Timoney 2021_pp. 135-36 ^{(’social org composed of industry + regulators + politicians united by financial interests excluded the public from participation in protecting their health & their environment; meanwhile, those responsible sit safely behind a firewall’)} Kevin Timoney Hidden Scourge: Exposing the truth about fossil fuel industry spills Montreal: McGill University 2021

(_pp. 135-36: ’Shockingly, the two largest releases in Canadian history, both from Alberta, are missing from the regulator’s database (the saline blowout at Peace River Oils #1 and crude oil blowout Atlantic No. 3).

… Environmental information and monitoring of abandoned wells are inadequate. The human health and climate changing effects of leakage from [plugged] wells have been underestimated.

… Viewed as a whole, the regulator’s data misinform on all aspects relevant to the impacts of spills be they spill and recovery volumes, per cent recovery, spill locations, effects on habitat and wildlife, the occurrence of spills in sensitive areas, spill footprints, and the causes of spills.

Then there is the information that is simply missing, characterized by thousands of spills with blank data fields, spills of unknown substances, spills by unnamed companies, and spills onto land whose owners are unknown.

Then there are the thousands of missing spills and tens of thousands of spills that lie outside the jurisdiction of the regulator.

The regulator’s data have been cobbled together over the years from unverified information supplied by industry. In short, it’s a mess. In a way, it’s worse than having no information because the regulator’s data provide the appearance of monitoring without the substance.

… history teaches us to be vigilant to the danger signs … today in Alberta the danger signs are … spills hidden from view, poor regulatory oversight, failure to gather credible data, and failure or refusal to provide the public with complete and accurate information.

A social organization composed of industry, regulators, and politicians united by financial interests excluded the public from participation in protecting their health and their environment.

We are repeating those same mistakes today across a broad swath of North America.

We have created a vast minefield where millions of people must live with the spectre of contaminated sites and abandoned wells.

Meanwhile, those responsible sit safely behind a firewall.’)

Wren et al. 2023_p. 7 ^{(’real oilsands GHG emissions average 65->100% higher than industry reporting’)} Sumi N. Wren, Chris A. McLinden, Debora Griffin, Shao-Meng Li, Stewart G. Cober, Andrea Darlington, Katherine Hayden, Cristian Mihele, Richard L. Mittermeier, Michael J. Wheeler, Mengistu Wolde and John Liggio “Aircraft and satellite observations reveal historical gap between top–down and bottom–up CO2 emissions from Canadian oil sands” PNAS Nexus v2#5 (May 2023): 1-12

(_p. 7: ‘As illustrated by Fig. 4A, for all cases and across all years, the top–down CO2 emissions estimates are larger than the reported CO2 emissions, with the average top–down estimate ranging from 65% to over 100% larger.’)

Moriarty 2022a ^{(AB becomes Covid death outlier from Fall`21)} University of Toronto Associate Professor Tara Moriarty ‘Age-adjusted excess deaths/100K’ Twitter (31 January 2022)

Moriarty 2022b ^{(xmas`21 wave after unmitigated Fall semester)} University of Toronto Associate Professor Tara Moriarty ‘Moving average of percent positivity (last 7 days)’ Twitter (12 March 2022)

Moriarty 2022c ^{(Canada worst in Covid testing by Mar`22)} University of Toronto Associate Professor Tara Moriarty ‘Daily new COVID-19 tests per 1,000 people, Mar 25, 2022’ Twitter (28 March)

Moriarty 2022d ^{(unmitigated xmas`21 wave infected estimated 70% of Albertans)} University of Toronto Associate Professor Tara Moriarty ‘Estimated % of people infected with Omicron from Dec 9/21-Mar 24/22’ Twitter (11 April 2022)

Moriarty 2022e ^{(as if lessons of previous waves forgotten/not allowed)} University of Toronto Associate Professor Tara Moriarty ‘Canada cumulative: Hospitalizations: Rolling average (7 days)’ Twitter (20 April 2022)

Parker 2023a ^{(Alberta never had lockdowns)} Take Back Alberta Executive Director David J. Parker Twitter (5 September 2023): 8:15am

Parker 2023b ^{(‘out organize me if you want vaccines’)} Take Back Alberta Executive Director David J. Parker Twitter (5 September 2023): 9:36pm

Rolling Stone 19/10/23 ^{(‘big money from some of country’s largest charities flowed to peddlers of anti-vaccine misinformation’)} Walker Bragman and Alex Kotch “America’s biggest charities bankrolled RFK Jr.’s anti-vax outfit: Children’s Health Defense and other groups promoting vaccine misinformation discreetly raked in money from anonymous donors through some of the largest charities in the country” Rolling Stone (19 October 2023)

(’Throughout the Covid pandemic, big money flowed to groups supposedly promoting public health but in reality were peddling anti-vaccine misinformation, from some of the largest charities in the country, an analysis by Rolling Stone and Important Context has found.

We tracked more than $15 million that donor-advised fund sponsors gave in 2020-22 to such groups — the lion’s share of the funds were distributed after the vaccines became available.

… While DAFs [donor-advised funds] come with significant benefits for donors, like the ability to transfer appreciable assets such as stocks without the burden of capital gains tax, the big draw for some is anonymity.

Donors can give tax-deductible contributions to groups of their choosing without having their fingerprints on the money. The public won’t see the original donor’s name on any public filings, and recipient organizations don’t even have to report the original donor’s name privately to the IRS.

Recipient organizations might not even know the identities of the donors. For this reason, DAFs are a common vehicle for funding entities like hate groups — or Covid-misinformation operations.

… Covid-related misinformation has also fueled anger toward public-health officials and medical professionals. In February 2022, the American Medical Association noted that while threats of violence against such individuals had been on the rise for a decade, the uptick had become “even more of an alarming phenomenon since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic.”

… With significant funding behind their operations, groups encouraging vaccine skepticism have helped politicize the lifesaving jabs and the pandemic as a whole. With politicization has come radicalization.

Cutting off the funding spigot could help defuse some of the tension, but doing so is no easy task. Although DAF sponsors have full legal control over the funds they distribute, getting them to stop funding anti-vaccine and anti-public-health organizations may prove difficult.’)

Hotez 2023_{pp. 42-48, 147, 149} ^{(’somehow, low vaccination coverage & sky-high COVID-19 death rates became normalized in America’)}_, 147 ^{(‘anti-science aggression may soon expand its firepower capabilities; it already kills many people & causes permanent injury to countless others’)} Peter J. Hotez The Deadly Rise of Anti-Science: A scientist’s warning Baltimore: John Hopkins University 2023

(_{pp. 42-48, 147, 149}: ’For almost the entire pandemic, the United States has been ground zero for COVID deaths. … the country has also suffered more COVID deaths per capita than any other large-population, high-income nation. …

… deaths in America continued to climb precipitously even after the vaccines were made widely available to the public.

… the fact that the trajectory of COVID-19 deaths more or less overlaps with European nations up until the time vaccines were widely available suggests that stalling vaccination rates accounted for most of the deaths.

Somehow, low vaccination coverage and sky-high COVID-19 death rates became normalized in America.

Ultimately, our national failure to vaccinate Americans was responsible for a high proportion of the 245,000 COVID-19 deaths from May 1 [when vaccines became widely-available] to December 31, 2021.…

… Other independent estimates generally support my analysis. …

… Up until the mid-twentieth century, there was no obvious anti-science contingent in the Republican Party. …

… In the years following the Nixon, Reagan, and two Bush administrations, right-wing anti-science tendencies expanded and became more ferocious.’)

(_p. 147: ’Still another concern is the fact that large numbers of healthcare professionals shunned COVID-19 vaccinations during the pandemic, including many from conservative or religious groups …

Then, in 2020, Renée DiResta from the Stanford Internet Observatory raised yet another concern. Artificial intelligence (AI) now generates disinformation at an accelerated pace.

Her warning, published in the Atlantic with the title “The Supply of Disinformation Will Soon Be Infinite,” suggests that anti-science aggression may soon expand its firepower capabilities.

A key point to remember is that anti-science is no longer a theoretical construct. It already kills many people and causes permanent injury to countless others.’)

Hotez 2018_{pp. xiv-xv, 18, 51-67, 187-88} ^{(’American-led anti-vaccine movement has become scary powerful & well-organized pseudoscience’)} Peter J. Hotez Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism: My journey as a vaccine scientist, pediatrician, and autism dad Baltimore: John Hopkins University 2018

(_{pp. xiv-xv, 18, 51-67, 187-88}: ’parents and guardians are walking away from protecting their children against [measles] and other deadly scourges in unprecedented numbers.

They are abandoning the option of protecting their children because of phony propaganda released by an anti-vaccine movement that began in 1998.

Since then … An American-led anti-vaccine movement … has become scary, powerful, and well organized … pseudoscience …

… As the global public health community geared up to vaccinate the world’s children … (under the auspices of the UN’s Millennial Development Goals in the early 2000s), a counterforce was also beginning to take shape.

During this period a new or “neo” anti-vaccine or anti-vaxx (anti-vax) movement was beginning in the United Kingdom, Europe, and ultimately the United States. …

… The big problem, of course, is that the Internet-fueled anti-vaccine movement has now translated into dangerous activities across the United States and now globally.’)

Pew 2022_p. 8 ^{(’81% of US adults say they personally know someone who has been hospitalized or died from Covid)} Cary Funk, Alex Tyson, Giancarlo Pasquini and Alison Spencer “Americans reflect on nation’s COVID-19 response: Fewer than half say the country has given the right amount of priority to the needs of K-12 students, public health, quality of life” Pew Research Center (7 July 2022): 46pp

(_p. 8: ’To date, over a million Americans have died from COVID-19.

Firsthand connections to people who have experienced serious cases of COVID-19 are common among the public: 81% of U.S. adults — including 88% of Black and 86% of Hispanic adults — say they know someone personally who has been hospitalized or died from the coronavirus.’)

Pew 2023_p. 5 ^{(‘since Covid, 24% more Republicans don’t believe scientists act in public interest’)} Brian Kennedy and Alec Tyson “Americans’ trust in scientists, positive views of science continue to decline: Among both Democrats and Republicans, trust in scientists is lower than before the pandemic” Pew Research Center (14 November 2023): 40pp

(_p. 5: ’nearly four-in-ten Republicans (38%) now say they have not too much or no confidence at all in scientists to act in the public’s best interests.

This share is up dramatically from the 14% of Republicans who held this view in April 2020.

Much of this shift occurred during the first two years of the pandemic and has persisted in more recent surveys.’)

AP 1/11/23 ^{(‘increase may seem small, but it’s 1st statistically significant jump in rate since increase btwn 2001&`02’)} Mike Stobbe “Infant mortality in the US rose last year for the first time in two decades, says CDC” Associated Press (1 November 2023)

(’“It’s definitely concerning, given that it’s going in the opposite direction from what it has been,” said Marie Thoma, a University of Maryland researcher who studies maternal and infant mortality.

… The increase may seem small, but it’s the first statistically significant jump in the rate since the increase between 2001 and 2002, said Danielle Ely, the CDC report’s lead author.

She also said researchers could not establish whether the 2022 rise was a one-year statistical blip — or the beginning of a more lasting trend.

Overall in the US, the death rate fell 5% in 2022 — a general decrease that’s been attributed to the waning impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially on people 65 and older.

US maternal deaths also fell last year.

More than 30 states saw at least slight rises in infant mortality rates in 2022, but four states had statistically significant increases — Georgia, Iowa, Missouri and Texas.’)

CDC 2023_p. 1222 ^{(`23: ‘vaccine exemptions increased in 41 states, exceeding 5% in 10 states, increasing risk for outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases’)} Ranee Seither, Oyindamola Bidemi Yusuf, Devon Dramann, Kayla Calhoun, Agnes Mugerwa-Kasujja and Cynthia L. Knighton “Coverage with selected vaccines and exemption from school vaccine requirements among children in kindergarten: United States, 2022–23 School Year” US Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report v72#45 (10 November 2023): 1217-24

(_p. 1222: ’What is already known about this topic?

From the 2019-20 to the 2021-22 school year, national coverage with state-required vaccines among kindergartners declined from 95% to approximately 93%, ranging from 92.7% for diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) to 93.1% for polio.

What is added by this report?

During the 2022–23 school year, coverage remained near 93% for all reported vaccines, ranging from 92.7% for DTaP to 93.1% for measles, mumps, and rubella and polio. The exemption rate increased 0.4 percentage points to 3.0%. Exemptions increased in 41 states, exceeding 5% in 10 states.

What are the implications for public health practice?

Exemptions >5% limit the level of achievable vaccination coverage, which increases the risk for outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases. Vaccination before school entry or during provisional enrollment periods could reduce exemptions resulting from barriers to vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic.’)

Bowe, Xie & Al-Aly 2023 ^{(first longer-term study of Long COVID)} Benjamin Bowe, Yan Xie and Ziyad Al-Aly “Postacute sequelae of COVID-19 at 2 years” Nature Medicine v29#9 (September 2023): 2347-57

(_p. 2347: ’We built a cohort of 138,818 individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and 5,985,227 noninfected control group from the US Department of Veterans Affairs and followed them for 2 years to estimate the risks of death and 80 prespecified postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC)…

… More than 3 years after the onset of the COVID-19 global pandemic, a wave of evidence suggests that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can lead to postacute sequelae in pulmonary and broad array of extrapulmonary organ systems—including increased risks and burdens of cardiovascular disorders, neurologic and mental health disorders, metabolic disorders (diabetes and dyslipidemia), kidney disorders and gastrointestinal disorders.

… the substantial cumulative burden of health loss due to PASC calls for attention to the care needs of people with long-term health effects due to SARS-CoV-2 infection.’)

Fanon 1961_p. 216n7 ^{(‘fascism is colonialism come home’)} Frantz Fanon Les damnés de la terre [The Wretched of the Earth] (1961; Paris: Kiyakaat 2016) trans. in Jonathan M. Katz Gangsters of Capitalism: Smedley Butler, the Marines, and the making and breaking of America’s empire (New York: St. Martin’s 2021): 318

(_p. 216n7: «What is fascism but colonialism in the heart of a traditionally colonialist country?»)

↩︎

Taylor 2019_pp. 12-13 ^{(‘Imperial Oil was Canada’s defender against Standard Oil “octopus”; Liberals systematically dismantled protectionist measures shielding Imperial Oil from Rockefellers’)}_, 51-52 ^{(1898: ‘remarkably generous takeover prevented lawsuits & criticism; as usual, Standard achieved its objective secretly’)} Graham D. Taylor Imperial Standard: Imperial Oil, Exxon and the Canadian oil industry from 1880 Calgary: University of Calgary 2019

Dziuban 1959_p. 2 ^{(‘as early as 1902, PM Laurier acknowledged Monroe Doctrine as Canada’s basic protection’)} Colonel Stanley W. Dziuban Military Relations Between the United States and Canada 1939-1945 United States Army Center of Military History Publication #11-5 (1959): 449pp; reprinted Washington: CMH 1990

Gillis & Roach 1986_p. 173 ^{(‘conference completed <2 weeks before Taft’s inauguration; almost immediately Congress deleted funding for National Conservation Commission’)} R. Peter Gillis and Thomas R. Roach “The American influence on conservation in Canada: 1899-1911” Journal of Forest History v30#4 (October 1986): 160-74

Eayrs 1957_p. 6 ^{(Laurier: “Canada ruled by junta in London called Round Table”)} James Eayrs “The Round Table movement in Canada, 1909-1920” Canadian Historical Review v38#1 (March 1957): 1-20

Pinchot 1940_p. 184 ^{(‘2 attempts to revive global conservation conference btwn WWI & WWII’)} Former Pennsylvania governor (1931-35) Gifford Pinchot “Conservation as a foundation of permanent peace” Nature v146#3693 (10 August 1940): 183-85↩︎

Hoover Library 3/3/21 ^{(‘Hoover dazzled world w/ meteoric rise to fame; nominated by President Harding & confirmed by Senate as Secretary of Commerce in Mar`21’)} Spencer Howard “Wonder Boy: Herbert Hoover as Secretary of Commerce” Herbert Hoover Library and Museum Hoover Heads blog (3 March 2021)

(’It’s hard for us to imagine how incredibly popular he was before entering the White House, and how he dazzled the world with his meteoric rise to fame. …

The Commerce Department had a reputation as a sleepy government backwater, primarily responsible for lighthouses and fisheries, but under Hoover’s leadership it became the most dynamic agency in Washington.

Hoover reorganized and expanded the Department, especially its divisions concerned with foreign trade, the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Standards.

He called over three thousand conferences to encourage efficiency, standardization and elimination of waste in industry.

Hoover also played a key role in the development and regulation of new technologies such as radio broadcasting and the earliest passenger airlines.

… The relentlessly conservative Calvin Coolidge could barely hide his annoyance with the activist commerce secretary, whom he mocked as “The Wonder Boy.”

But as president, Coolidge leaned heavily on Hoover for advice, and even allowed Hoover to ghost write key policy statements such as veto messages for the McNary-Haugen farm bills.

… In 1928, when President Coolidge declined to run for reelection, Herbert Hoover was urged to become the Republican candidate.

Hoover’s reputation, experience, and public popularity coalesced to insure his nomination as a Presidential candidate. In November, he was elected 31st President of the United States in a landslide.’)

Clements 1984_pp. 67n1 ^{(‘Hoover’s memoir neither factually reliable nor especially helpful’)}_, 77-78 ^{(‘Hoover issued a statement deploring the exhaustion of American oilfields; FOCB advocated aggressive pursuit of foreign oil’)} Kendrick A. Clements “Herbert Hoover and conservation, 1921-33” American Historical Review v89#1 (February 1984): 67-88

(_p. 67n1: ‘The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover: The Cabinet and the Presidency, 1920-1933 (New York, 1952) is neither factually reliable nor especially helpful for this topic.’)

(_pp. 77-78: ’Soon after he became secretary of commerce, Hoover issued a statement deploring the exhaustion of American oilfields and urging an aggressive search for foreign sources. …

… On December 18 [1924] the president appointed … a Federal Oil Conservation Board … Concentrating its attention on eventual shortages, the board advocated aggressive pursuit of foreign oil’)

Vitalis 2020 ^{(‘by 1936, I found general adoption by US & UK elites of argument colonies “did not pay”’)} Robert Vitalis Oilcraft: The myths of scarcity and security that haunt US energy policy Stanford: Stanford University 2020

Kimball 1921_p. 400 ^{(‘All thinking engineers aware of inefficient manner our city + state + national gov are conducted; if any class of men have a duty to band themselves together for betterment of our nation, engineers have full justification’)} Dean of Cornell University’s college of engineering and vice president of the American Engineering Council Dexter S. Kimball “The American Engineering Council” Science (new series) v53#1347 (29 April 1921): 399-402 [remarks in honour of Herbert Hoover at the Engineer’s Club of Philadelphia, April 16^th 1921]

(_p. 400: ‘All thinking engineers are aware of the inefficient manner in which much of the engineering and industrial features of our government, city, state, and national, are conducted’)

(_p. 400: ’Industry is the life of our nation, and engineering is the backbone of industry.

Surely if any class of men have a right, or better still, a duty, to band themselves together for the betterment of the fundamental industrial principles of our nation, engineers, using the term in a broad sense, have full justification for doing so.

These are matters of common knowledge to all engineers and scarcely need to be defended or explained.’)

FAES 1921_p. v ^{(‘American Engineering Council created The Federated American Engineering Societies, Herbert Hoover elected its 1st president Nov`20’)} Committee on Elimination of Waste in Industry “Preface” (June 1921) to Committee on Elimination of Waste in Industry of the Federated American Engineering Societies Waste In Industry (New York: McGraw-Hill 1921): v-vii

(_p. v: ’Toward the end of 1920, The Federated American Engineering Societies came into being, through the convening of its executive body the American Engineering Council.

On November 19, Herbert Hoover was elected the first President, and among his first acts suggested a study into the restrictions and wastes of industry.

On November 20, the executive board authorized the appointment of a committee to make such an investigation and immediately thereafter the general plans were drafted and a small preliminary committee selected.

On January 12, 1921, Mr. Hoover named fifteen engineers as the Committee on Elimination of Waste in Industry and added two others at a later date’)

Hoover 1921 ^{(‘wastes all combine to represent huge deduction from goods & services we might all enjoy’)} Herbert Hoover “Foreword” to Committee on Elimination of Waste in Industry of the Federated American Engineering Societies Waste In Industry (New York: McGraw-Hill 1921): ix

(’This reconnaissance report on waste in industry is the result of five months of intensive study, carefully planned and rapidly executed. … It reveals facts which may serve as a foundation for an advance in American industry.

… our industrial machine is far from perfect. The wastes … all combine to represent a huge deduction from the goods and services that we might all enjoy if we could do a better job of it.’)

↩︎

Clements 1984_{pp. 67-68, 87} ^{(’Hoover had little first-hand knowledge of the movement before defining conservation as waste elimination just before becoming Secretary of Commerce’)}_, 70-74 ^{(‘in all cases, Hoover’s department emphasized making the producer’s return larger’)}_, 84 ^{(‘Hoover said “capitalists are too damned greedy”, but still based conservation policy on expectation of altruistic behavior by businessmen’)} Kendrick A. Clements “Herbert Hoover and conservation, 1921-33” American Historical Review v89#1 (February 1984): 67-88

(_{pp. 67-68, 87}: ’Both the American public and government in this period [1920-33] showed increasing concern for conservation in all its varied forms.

Concern did not, however, assure agreement. …

Herbert Hoover … was a latecomer to the conservation movement, and he arrived by an unusual route.

Living outside the country for most of the two decades before 1920, he had little first-hand knowledge of the movement until he became secretary of commerce in 1921.

… The definition of conservation as waste elimination, first articulated by Hoover just before his tenure at commerce … He altered this view very little in later years.

… Ultimately … the greatest weaknesses of Hoover’s conservation program were its narrow definition and his naive faith in human rationality. …

… Hoover paid lipservice [to nature] … and he found serving [as honorary president of an outdoorsman organization] … politically useful, but he was not just a simple fisherman in tune with nature.’)

(_pp. 70-74: ’Elected president of a new organization, the Federated American Engineering Societies (FAES), in November 1920, Hoover seized the opportunity to appoint a special committee of prominent engineers to study the causes of industrial waste. …

… Soon after Hoover became secretary of commerce in 1921 he made implementation of the committee’s recommendations his department’s major mission. …

… In all cases the department emphasized … making the producer’s return larger while permitting the payment of higher wages.

Conservation per say was not a central goal of the campaign, but, in the form of “conservation by prudent use,” it was expected to be a fringe benefit.

… With no sacrifice on anyone’s part, profits, wages, and the standard of living would rise, social harmony would be assured, and resources would be conserved.

And to those who objected that the millennium would come at the cost of eliminating competition and subverting antitrust laws, Hoover replied that his proposals would increase “constructive competition.”

… The aim of Hoover’s programs was not, whatever his rhetoric, competition but

Cooperation. …

The standardization and waste-elimination campaigns of the commerce department did not seek the elimination of competition through a government-planned and controlled economy, but they assumed far greater centralize economic control than classical laissez faire theory permitted.

… A prime example of this method at its most successful was the Colorado River Compact of 1922. …

The technique of seeking conservation goals through interstate agreements thus

did not originate with Hoover, but he soon made the approach peculiarly his own.’)

(_p. 84: ’Hoover… once said to a friend, “… capitalists … they’re too damned greedy.” But he still based his conservation policy on the expectation of altruistic behavior by businessmen. …

… Voluntary agreements for production control in both the oil and the timber industries tended to result in price-fixing arrangements rather than conservation measures and to infringe the antitrust laws.’)

Merriam 1944a_pp. 397 ^{(‘To plan or not to plan is no real issue. The only issue is who shall plan for what ends.’)}_, 406 ^{(‘possibilities of planning in US set forth by National Resources Planning Board’)} Charles E. Merriam “The possibilities of planning” American Journal of Sociology v49#5 (March 1944): 397-407

(_p. 397: ’To plan or not to plan is no real issue. Planning even of economic affairs has existed at all levels of our national life, both public and private, since the beginning of our history.

The only issue is who shall plan for what ends. The democratic formula seeks concrete mechanisms to guarantee the full participation of all in planning for the common good.’)

(_p. 406: ’The possibilities of planning in the United States, at any rate, have been set forth by the National Resources Planning Board in the following terms:

The fullest possible development of the human personality, in relation to the common good, in a framework of freedoms and rights, of justice, liberty, equality, and the consent of the governed

The fullest possible development of the productive potential of all of our resources, material and human, with full employment, continuity of income, equal access to minimum security and living standards, and a balance between economic stability and social adventure.

An effective jural order of the world outlawing violence and imperialism, old or new fashioned, in international relations; and permitting and energizing the fullest development of resources and rights everywhere.’)

Merriam 1944b_p. 1079 ^{(‘NRPB’s underlying philosophy expressed in “A New Bill of Rights” offering freedom from irresponsible private power + arbitrary public authority + unregulated monopolies’)} Charles E. Merriam “The National Resources Planning Board: A chapter in American planning experience” American Political Science Review v38#6 (December 1944): 1075-88

(_p. 1079: ’The underlying philosophy of the Board was expressed in what was called “A New Bill of Rights,” supplementing earlier and already existing rights already accepted:

“… right to fair play … right to adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care … right to security, with freedom from fear of old age, want, dependency, sickness, unemployment, and accident; … the right to live … free from … irresponsible private power, arbitrary public authority, and unregulated monopolies … the right to … be … free from the spyings of secret political police”’)

Hoover 6/12/30 ^{(Hoover: “oilmen desire to have legalized some control which is illegal, otherwise they would do it themselves”)} President Herbert Hoover to Secretary of the Interior Ray Wilbur (6 December 1930) cited in Kendrick A. Clements “Herbert Hoover and conservation, 1921-33” American Historical Review v89#1 (February 1984): 79n34

TSLAC 2011_p. 6 ^{(‘on 14Aug`31, 1200 Texas oil producers met in Tyler & unanimously asked the Rockefeller governor to declare martial law. On August 17, they got their wish’)} “The oil wars” in Hazardous Business: Industry, regulation and the Texas Railroad Commission (Austin: Texas State Library and Archives Commission 2011): 9pp

Hoover Library 3/3/21 ^{(‘3,000 conferences on efficiency & standardization’)} Spencer Howard “Wonder Boy: Herbert Hoover as Secretary of Commerce” Herbert Hoover Library and Museum Hoover Heads blog (3 March 2021)

Porfirenko & Conkin 1998_p. 2 ^{(’`29’s RCOST the latest & most comprehensive of a series of governmental & privately sponsored studies, beginning in 1921 w/ report on “Waste in Industry” under Herbert Hoover’s chairmanship)} Natasha Porfirenko and Michael C. Conkin “United States President’s Research Committee On Social Trends records” Stanford University Hoover Institution Library and Archives Finding Aid (1998): 5pp

(_p. 2: ’The discussion of the project and the preliminary work were initiated in September 1929. Funds to support the studies were appropriated by the Rockefeller Foundation in November 1929, and were administrated by the Social Science Research Council in New York City.

… Herbert Hoover’s foreword to the two volume report of findings of the Committee indicates his reasons for initiating the work and making the effort to obtain support for the studies. …

“… This study is the latest and most comprehensive of a series, some of them governmental and others privately sponsored, beginning in 1921 with the report on “Waste in Industry” under my chairmanship.

… The survey is entirely the work of the committee and its experts, as it was my desire to have a complete, impartial examination of the facts.

… Since the task assigned to the Committee was to inquire into changing trends, the result is emphasis on elements of instability rather than stability in our social structure.”’)

Merriam 1944b_p. 1085 ^{(’Board’s functions now distributed among wide variety of agencies central & local, public & private; far more planning than ever before’)} Charles E. Merriam “The National Resources Planning Board: A chapter in American planning experience” American Political Science Review v38#6 (December 1944): 1075-88

(_p. 1085: ’Since the discontinuance of the Board, its functions have been distributed among a wide variety of agencies, central and local, distributed among a wide variety of agencies, central and local, public and private. …

On the whole, there has been far more planning than ever before, on all levels of government and society.’)

↩︎

Boychuk 2022c ^{(foreign installation of comprador Ernest Manning in Alberta cabinet in 1935)} Regan Boychuk “Who would do this to themselves? Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part three” York University Capital-as-Power blog (13 December 2022)

NYT 24/5/37 ^{(JDR Sr. obit)} Paul Crowell “John D. Rockefeller dies at 97 in his Florida home: funeral to be held here” New York Times (24 May 1937): 1, 8

(’John D. Rockefeller Sr. … wanted to live until July 9, 1939, when he would have rounded out a century of life, died at 4:05 A.M. here today at The Casements, his Winter home, a little more than two years and a month from his cherished goal.

Death came suddenly to the founder of the great Standard Oil organization—so suddenly that none of his immediate family was with him at the end.’)

Santucci 2005_p. 128 ^{(Gramsci’s death)} Antonio A. Santucci Antonio Gramsci, 1897-1937 2005; Graziella Di Mauro with Engel-Di Mauro (trans.) New York: Monthly Review 2010

Gramsci 1930_pp. 275-76 ^{(‘the old is dying & the new cannot be born’)} Antonio Gramsci Selections from the Prison Notebooks (1929-35) Quinton Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith (eds. & trans.) (New York: International Publishers 1971): Notebook 3 (1930)

(_pp. 275-76: ‘The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.’)

Achcar 2022 ^{(‘Let us decipher language of Prison Notebooks, which Gramsci had to encrypt for obvious censorship reasons; applying Gramsci’s sentence to current reality is therefore legitimate, even if it is historically inaccurate’)} Gilbert Achcar “Morbid symptoms: What did Gramsci really mean?” Notebooks: The journal for studies of power v1#2 (February 2022): 379-87

Richards & Pratt 1979_pp. 78-79 ^{(‘Aberhart telegraphed assurances to financial press + oil trade bulletins that radical thrust of Social Credit’s right populist movement not directed at oil industry’)}_, 87-88 ^{(‘To some, Tanner’s campaign was nothing short of betrayal: Standard Oil was about as popular among prairie populists as the CPR or any other outside monopoly’)}_, 224 ^{(’30 Co’s accounted for 95% of AB’s 1970 production + held 50% of net acreage in 1970’)} John Richards and Larry Pratt Prairie Capitalism: Power and influence in the new west Toronto: McClelland & Stewart 1979

(_{pp. 78-79, 87-88, 224}: ’From the date of their landslide victory in 1935, Social Credit’s leadership made it clear that the radical thrust of their right populist movement was not directed at the oil industry.

… Premier Aberhart telegraphed assurances to the financial press and the oil trade bulletins that the province intended to give every incentive to risk capital.

In 1936 Aberhart appointed Nathan Eldon Tanner to be Minister of Lands and Mines … More than any other Alberta politician, including Ernest Manning, Tanner was the real author of the province’s regulatory system for oil and gas.

In his sixteen years in the portfolio (before leaving politics in 1952 to make his fortune in oil and gas, notably as the first president of Trans-Canada Pipelines; today he is a senior Elder in the Mormon Church hierarchy in Salt Lake City, Utah), Tanner put in place most of the complex administrative apparatus for allocating exploration and development rights to crown minerals, for regulating production, and for controlling the removal of gas from Alberta.

… Tanner’s department imported officials from the Texas Railroad Commission and other US agencies to supervise the creation of Alberta’s Oil and Gas Conservation Board and to devise schemes for reducing the wastage in the Turner Valley.

… Tanner launched a vigorous campaign to stimulate the search for Alberta’s oil and gas.

… the province’s exploration permit and leasing regulations were amended in favour of private operators …

The pattern of development established under Nathan Tanner in the first months of Social Credit rule laid the foundations for the growth of the province’s oil industry after Leduc.

… it was, as we have seen, in the later 1930s that the basis of the regulatory structure was conceived and passed into law.

Profoundly conservative in its emphasis on property rights and strongly influenced by the regulatory tradition of the southwest United States, much of this structure persists today and is now deeply imbedded in the statutes of Alberta and in the corpus of Canadian oil and gas law.

To some Social Credit supporters Nathan Tanner’s campaign to attract development money to Alberta was nothing short of betrayal. Standard Oil was about as popular among prairie populists as the CPR or any other outside monopoly. …

… Several features of Alberta’s allocative process encouraged a rapid rate of development, creating an excessive accumulation of reserves.

The “first come first served” policy of allocating exploration permits, work requirements on permits, lease renewal provisions, fragmentation of ownership rights to pools, all encouraged the great land plays and too rapid a rate of development, leading in turn to shut-in production and marketing problems.

Like the rule of capture, which impels each operator to produce at a maximum rate before the opportunity is lost to competitors on adjacent properties, provincial allocation policies had the effect of encouraging private exploration, development and the accumulation of reserves at faster-than-optimal rates, and thus dissipating economic rent.

… Put simply, accelerated development of oil reduced aggregate rent by increasing per barrel costs. The reduction was absorbed by governments who sacrificed some potential rents to induce private investors to advance the timing of investment.

… The province’s land tenure policies had allowed the major integrated companies to lease large tracts of potential oil-bearing land.

Thirty companies accounted for 95 per cent of Alberta’s production in 1970, and these same firms held 50 per cent of net acreage holdings in the province.’)

Hawryluk 2011 ^{(‘Latter-day Saint ’conservation ethic’ clearly devoted to resource development rather than preservation; Tanner’s US tour led to`38 creation of AB o&g regulator’)} Nathan Hawryluk “Nathan Eldon Tanner: Religion and petroleum” Petroleum History Society Archives v22#1(February 2011): 7-8

(’Believing “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof” and that “the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves,” for Latter-day Saints stewardship extended to resources.

Thus the Latter-day Saint “environmental conservation ethic” was “clearly ethnocentric [and] devoted to resource development … rather than to wilderness preservation, but … also opposed the reckless squandering of nature.”

… Under Tanner’s direction, production-oriented conservation increased.

He toured the United States to evaluate conservation laws, leading to the creation of [Alberta’s] Petroleum and Natural Gas Conservation Board in 1938.’)

NYT 24/5/37 ^{(JDR Sr. obit)} Paul Crowell “John D. Rockefeller dies at 97 in his Florida home: funeral to be held here” New York Times (24 May 1937): 1, 8

(’John D. Rockefeller Sr. … wanted to live until July 9, 1939, when he would have rounded out a century of life, died at 4:05 A.M. here today at The Casements, his Winter home, a little more than two years and a month from his cherished goal.

Death came suddenly to the founder of the great Standard Oil organization—so suddenly that none of his immediate family was with him at the end.’)

Ely 1938_{pp. 1209, 1211, 1241, 1242, 1244} ^{(‘conservation laws enacted upon insistence of industry & indifference of consuming public’)} Northcutt Ely “The conservation of oil” Harvard Law Review v51#7 (May 1938): 1209-44

(_{pp. 1209, 1211, 1241, 1242, 1244}: ’In reaching for the dual objectives of conservation and stabilization, the industry has invoked the aid of the legislatures and the courts in developing a regulatory mechanism which is peculiar to this resource, and which involves an unusual interplay of federal and state powers of regulation.

… in controlling the output of the crude supply so successfully created by individual initiative, the industry has invited and received an extraordinary amount of governmental planning and control.

… The complex system now governing petroleum production is essentially producers’ legislation. … the conservation laws have been enacted upon the insistence of the industry, and the indifference of the consuming public. …

The consuming public has never become exercised to the point of transferring the issues to an arena which it might dominate—Congress.

… the industry which delivers energy by the exhaustion of a limited resource is governed only by the laws which it has itself invoked …

… It may be impossible for our successors to believe that in the span of less than a century our system of laws allowed the loss of an essential resource and a resort to substitutes; that our people voluntarily submitted to the process; and that the industry was helpless to avoid it.’)

↩︎

Round Table 1935a “Canada I: The Social Credit movement in Alberta” Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs v26#101 (October 1935): 157-65

Round Table 1935b “Canada II: The general election” Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs v26#101 (October 1935): 166-73

Colby & Dennett 1995_pp. 75-83 ^{(‘Since fall`35, Nelson had been conveying w/ evangelical fervor: Reform was needed. The old British blueprint for colonial operations had been a disaster’; thus, “The Social Responsibility of Corporations” was born at Standard Oil’s`37 AGM)}_, 83-86 ^{(Feb`38: ‘FDR administration preferred to ride out confiscation of oil Co’s provoking Mexican sovereignty’)}_, 87-89 ^{(‘Roosevelt handed job of engaging in commercial warfare in Latin America to the new assistant secretary of state for Latin American affairs: Adolf Berle; Berle unsuited for delicate task of strengthening goodwill brought about by Good Neighbor policy’)} Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennett Thy Will Be Done: The conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and evangelism in the age of oil New York: Harpercollins 1995

(_pp. 75-83: ‘The United States was a vast buyers’ market in December 1934, and the Rockefellers were one of the few families who could still afford to be big buyers.

Chase, now under Rockefeller leadership, was about to back oil in a big way, in both the United States and Latin America …

… In 1935, Nelson went abroad to work full time for Chase …

… Senior had passed away in the early morning of May 23 [1937] … Nelson flew back for a private funeral service at Pocantico … attended by … families of Standard Oil Trust’s partners.

Some weeks later, Nelson saw the descendants of his grandfather’s old partners again, and this time he was challenging them.

Since his return from Latin America, he had been conveying a message to friends, business associates, and family members with evangelical fervor: Reform was needed.

The old British blueprint for colonial operations had been a disaster.

If it had not been for the dedication of American missionaries, teachers, and doctors, such as those of the Rockefeller Foundation, a hurricane of anti-Yankee rage would have long ago swept over Latin America—and Standard Oil.

Nelson presented his sense of urgency to the executives of Standard Oil of New Jersey and offered to address its foreign-branch officers at Standard Oil’s annual meeting.

… the oilmen were in no position to refuse, but after Nelson had delivered his address, entitled, “The Social Responsibility of Corporations,” they may have wished they had.

Before 300 executives of what was then the largest industrial corporation in America, Nelson challenged the men to develop a sense of responsibility that went beyond the well-being of the machine and the size of the shareholders’ dividends.

His concern was for “ownership of property anywhere in the world. Such ownership,” he explained, “can only be justified if the property serves the broad interests of the people in the host country. This means recognition of obligations to the public welfare.”

… “We must recognize the social responsibilities of corporations and the corporation must use its ownership of assets to reflect the best interests of the people. If we don’t, they will take away our ownership.”

The older Standard officials refused to listen. …

Nelson knew from Bolivia and Venezuela that this arrogance was suicidal.

The unparalleled wealth and abundance that accompanied modern industry allowed for more flexible strategies than the traditions of strictness and thrift forced by an earlier age of scarcity.

The continued existence of inherited fortunes despite the Great Depression enabled younger heirs like Nelson Rockefeller and William Averell Harriman to rise to the challenge of public leadership with a confidence and optimism their elders did not enjoy.

… Grandfather bequeathed a board made up of company men set in their ways, and Nelson walked away from the Jersey Company’s 1937 annual meeting in defeat.

Before another year would pass, Standard’s general staff would flout the laws of both Venezuela and Mexico [and Alberta, Canada]. In Venezuela, they would get away with it.

But in Mexico … they faced a stronger president, Lázaro Cárdenas.’)

(_pp. 83-86: ’Standard Oil and a dozen other American and British companies had refused to sign a general labor contract with the new oil workers’ union, despite repeated concessions by the workers in their contract proposals.

Cárdenas was caught between the companies belligerence and the threat of political instability. Unless there was obedience to the law and some compromise, the president would have to act and risk armed US intervention. …

… “If I could just reach the stockholders of these companies,” Cárdenas said, “instead of their high-salaried agents who refuse to concede the justice of our demands.”

… Standard Oil was withdrawing funds from Mexico (later confirmed by the companies) and had even tried to remove equipment. …

… summoned to Washington in February 1938 to help in the mounting crisis .… Roosevelt advisor Adolf Berle … noted in his diary that “we prefer not to have a revolution and to ride out the confiscation of the oil companies. Again the oil companies prefer a revolution, not understanding that they may uncork a civil war of some magnitude.

By March 1938, the very sovereignty of the nation had been flouted by the companies’ refusal to abide by a Supreme Court decision awarding oil laborers 2.6 million pesos.

… In an interview with the president, the executives of the oil companies made their final mistake.

Cárdenas had just offered guarantees against further wage demands and tax increases, but he warned the oil executives that the Supreme Court’s decision would also be guaranteed.

The officials asked who would enforce these guarantees.

“Me,” answered Cárdenas, “the President of the Republic.”

“You!” a British oilman scoffed.

Cárdenas rose from his chair. “Gentlemen,” he said icily, “we have finished.”

His expropriation decree followed shortly.

… Standard Oil’s headquarters … [said] … Standard’s demand for the return of its oil holdings in Mexico was not negotiable. It wanted them back.

Standard’s intransience had a ruthless quality about it. In fact, it had been just that attitude which prompted Cárdenas to nationalize Standard’s properties in the first place.

… on March 30 … Roosevelt agreed … to resume silver purchases [from Mexico]. Cárdenas, having feared a US invasion, was elated.

[But it] only made Standard’s executives more furious at both Cárdenas, the “communist,” and Roosevelt, “the traitor to his class.”

They decided to retaliate with their own foreign policy, refusing to supply oil products to Mexico’s new national oil company, PEMEX. Twenty-one other companies joined the boycott.’)

(_pp. 87-89: ’In an age that seemed to be rolling uncontrollably toward the unbelievable—another world war—the Committee on Cooperation in Latin America turned desperately to cultural exchanges as a major means of promoting public support for peace treaties.

Yet it was in the commercial realm that men in Washington were most interested in.

Roosevelt handed the job of engaging in commercial warfare in Latin America to the new assistant secretary of state for Latin American affairs: Adolf Berle.

… With the Federal Reserve tightening the money supply and consumer spending slowing again, the “strike of capital” continued, drying up investments.

In July 1937, Japan invaded China. The following month, nervous American investors began unloading stocks to grab whatever profits they could.

The result was the most brutal drop in industrial stocks in the nation’s history.

By December the crash had wiped out all the gains the stock market had made since 1935, and 2 million people had lost their jobs.

As the crisis became publicly known as “Roosevelt’s Depression,” the President decided that his predecessor[ Coolidge]’s [imperial] emphasis on foreign markets might have been right all along.

… Domestic policy alone would not suffice. Foreign markets had to be expanded, and the aggressive behavior of the Axis powers no doubt gave urgency to Roosevelt’s increased concern with defending corporate America’s economic frontiers.

… For help, he turned to Adolf Berle … a member of the original … New Deal … Brain Trust.

The son of a minister and a lay missionary to the Sioux Indians, Berle … had been a member of Thomas Debevoise’s law firm; it was he who had steered John Collier in 1924 to Ray Fosdick for a Rockefeller grant.

Berle and Fosdick had both served in the US delegation to the Versailles Peace Conference and shared a disgust for the uncompromising and avaricious terms imposed by the Allied victors and their betrayals of wartime promises of self-determination for colonies like Vietnam and India that had fought for the Allies.

Modern corporate society could afford to be more generous, they believed: otherwise, not only renewed war, but revolutions, such as those that erupted in Russia, China, and Mexico, could spread.

… If the fleets and merchant marines were to move about the ports of Latin America unharassed to support the fighting in the North Atlantic and the South Pacific, the cooperation of Latin America was essential.

Making Fortress Inter-America a reality required the strengthening of the goodwill brought about by the Good Neighbor Policy.

For this delicate task of public relations, Berle was unsuited: He simply brought too much baggage with him from the business community and his participation in the US financial pressure and the gunboat diplomacy that replaced the civil government of Ramón Frau San Martin with the military dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista.

A new face was needed, and one that belonged to a mind that appreciated Latin American culture, nationalist sensitivities, and the importance of American business in tying the knot between development south of the Rio Grande and restored prosperity north of it.’)

Veblen 1920 ^{(‘victorious Power statesmen took side w/ war-guilty absentee owners of Germany & against their underlying population’)} Thorstein Veblen “The Economic Consequences of the Peace by John Maynard Keynes” Political Science Quarterly v35#3 (September 1920): 467-72

Emersberger 2020 ^{(‘Hitler was a genocidal maniac who succeeded for many years because he lived in a world run by like-minded genocidal maniacs … he was walking through doors left wide open by centuries of Western imperialism’)} Joe Emersberger “Mein Kampf: Hitler’s love letter to western imperialism” Red Sails (29 June 2022)

Preparata 2005 ^{(“British are most cunning people on earth, absolute masters in art of manipulating press & public opinion”)} Guido Giacomo Preparata Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America made the Third Reich London: Pluto 2005

(_{p. 234 {italics in original}}: ‘Hitler delegated Anglophile Joachim von Ribbentrop, a former champagne dealer who had married into a wine dynasty … to seal in London the ’35 percent deal’ for the German navy.

“Never forget,” Ribbentrop was warned before the negotiation by the military attaché of the Japanese embassy in London, Navy Captain Arata Oka, “that the British are the most cunning people on earth, and that they graduated to absolute masters in the art of negotiation as well as in that of manipulating the press and public opinion.”

… In the space of six months, spanning between the Norman-inspired Anglo-German Payments Agreement of late 1934, and the Naval Pact [agreed in May] … Hitler won from Britain no less than her official financial and military support.

The Fuhrer was exultant.’)

Ronald 2023 ^{(‘difficult to imagine attack on Pearl Harbor might have been prevented, but it is true’)} Susan Ronald Hitler’s Aristocrats: The secret power players in Britain and America who supported the Nazis, 1923–1941 London: Macmillan 2023↩︎

Colby & Dennett 1995_pp. 92-96 ^{(‘as 1940 elections approached, 2 powerful groups emerged to formulate a new US strategy; 1 was visible to public & press, other met in private, centered on Nelson Rockefeller & called itself the Junta; Nelson presents broad & far-reaching plan for “Hemisphere Economic Policy” same day AB Royal Commission report released: June 14th; FDR ordered economic program begin June 28’)} Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennett Thy Will Be Done: The conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and evangelism in the age of oil New York: Harpercollins 1995

(_pp. 92-96: ’As the elections of 1940 approached, two powerful groups with overlapping concerns were emerging to formulate a new US strategy toward Latin America.

One group, led by Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles, Assistant Secretary Adolf Berle, and Pan American Union head Leo Rowe, was visible to the public and the press. The other group met in private corporate offices and centered on Nelson Rockefeller.

Outsiders called it “the Group,” but it called itself the Junta.

And its convener was not Rockefeller, but a social scientist turned businessman who represented the contact between the two groups: Beardsley Ruml.

Ruml was Nelson Rockefeller’s advance man in Washington. By 1938, Ruml was trying to get young Rockefeller the proper entrée into the Democratic White House through Harry Hopkins.

… Hopkins had allied himself with Adolf Berle in fostering a new policy of closer cooperation with big business. The policy recommendations he received were increasingly focused on Latin America.

Hopkins shared Berle’s distress over German competition in Latin America. … This was the perfect climate for Ruml to introduce Nelson Rockefeller to the White House’s inner circle.

… “Nelson Rockefeller would esteem it a privilege … for you to spend about two hours at leisure with Nelson Rockefeller … and I should be delighted to arrange” … Ruml wrote Hopkins in December 1938. …

“I would like very much to see Nelson Rockefeller,” Hopkins replied in January. By March [1939], Nelson was standing before the president of the United States.

Roosevelt’s curiosity about Rockefeller had actually piqued the previous summer, when he was told that Nelson Rockefeller was “sympathetic—he feels quite differently from some of the members of his family.” …

Roosevelt had personal reasons for wanting to meet Nelson. The president was seeking an unprecedented third term in 1940.

Winning over the heir of the family that was doing its most to make Wall Street stockbroker Wendell Willkie his Republican successor would be a coup.

It might even encourage support from some business circles.

… [In early 1940] Bearsley Ruml had already begun holding meetings of the Junta at his Greenwich Village home.

Here were Nelson’s closest advisors, men who had participated in the first 1937 trip through Latin America and shared Nelson’s concerns about expanding American business in the region.

They wanted to stop the growing German and Italian investments and find some way of accommodating Latin America’s rising nationalism before socialist currents became too strong to reverse.

The meetings of the Junta soon moved from Ruml’s home to Rockefeller’s luxurious Fifth Avenue apartment.

… Ruml and Rockefeller took the proposals to Washington to discuss them with two of Roosevelt’s advisors. Nothing came of them.

Finally, in May, Ruml and Rockefeller decided to turn again to Hopkins. The busy Hopkins asked them to distill the Junta’s proposals into a policy paper.

Ruml set to work on what turned out to be a broad and far-reaching plan for a “Hemisphere Economic Policy.”

Nelson arrived at the White House on June 14 and was escorted immediately to the Lincoln Room. Hopkins was there to greet him.

… to coordinate all these efforts, a small advisory committee, directed by a presidential assistant with direct access to the president, would be required.

… It was obvious to Hopkins whom Nelson had in mind for that job and what the composition of the advisory committee would be if left to the Junta.

There was no doubt also that the Rockefeller Foundation could be expected to play a leading role and that American corporations, including those controlled by the Rockefeller financial interests, would rush into Latin America to fill the void left by the loss of European markets and investors.

Hopkins agreed to bring the subject up with “the Boss.” Within twenty-four hours, the Rockefeller group’s plan was on the president’s desk.

Roosevelt read the document and passed it along to Hull at State, Morgenthau at Treasury, and Wallace at Agriculture.

There were objections to the proposal, but as far as the president was concerned, they simply could not outweigh the formidable opportunity that the power of the Rockefellers offered.

The president ordered the economic program to begin June 28.

What made the Rockefeller-Ruml proposal unique was its proponents’ independence from bureaucratic infighting and their enormous financial power. Nelson [then 31], however, was passed over for the top job.

“Nelson doesn’t have the kind of ability needed for the job,” said presidential aide James V. Forrestal.’)

Stuart 1939 ^{(policy group visible to public & press as FDR’s Good Neighbor policy made US appear idealistic & weak)} _pp. 166 ^{(‘to succeed, concrete evidence of friendly intentions would be required & certain past mistakes had to be satisfactorily rectified’)}_, 167-68 ^{(‘question of intervention at Havana`28 + Montevideo`33 + Bueno Aires`36’)</sup><sub>, 168</sub> <sup>(‘Mexico gov makes nice with US oil Co’s Jun`39’)}_, 169-70 ^{(“more advantageous to live at peace & open trade channels, than to conquer + seize territory + govern an unwilling population”)} Graham Stuart “The results of the Good Neighbor policy in Latin America” World Affairs v102#3 (September 1939): 166-70

(_p. 166: ’The Good Neighbor policy of the Roosevelt administration has been functioning for six years under the sympathetic and able direction of Secretary of State Hull and Undersecretary Welles.

Has its result been such that it will be continued as a permanent policy of the United States in the Western Hemisphere or will it, upon the advent of a new administration, in the recondite phraseology of Grover Cleveland, be relegated to innocuous desuetude? …

… up till the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt the Latin Americans had a very definite impression that the acts of the United States hardly measured up to its friendly protestations.

We still insisted upon a unilateral interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine, we seemed unwilling to eschew intervention categorically, the Platt Amendment was a millstone upon Cuban sovereignty, and our efforts towards better trade relations were impossibly handicapped by the Hawley-Smoot tariff.

… To carry out such a [Good Neighbor] policy it was necessary not only to find opportunities to give concrete evidence of this friendly feeling but first of all certain mistakes of the past had to be satisfactorily rectified.’)

(_pp. 167-68: ’President Coolidge expressed a frank acceptance of the imperialistic point of view … in 1927 … and Coolidge administrations seemed to be based on such a premise. …

… the Latin Americans … wanted definite assurance that no state should intervene in the internal affairs of another.

… The question of intervention had appeared on the agenda of the … Sixth International Conference of American States held at Havana… in 1928, a brief convention stipulating that “No state may intervene in the internal affairs of another” was considered by delegates, but the United States opposed its adoption at that time.

However at the Montevideo Conference held in December, 1933, Secretary Hull declared that “no government need fear any intervention on the part of the United States under the Roosevelt administration,” and the convention on the rights and duties of states embodying this principle was signed by the American delegation and subsequently ratified.

… On May 29, 1934, a new treaty of relations between Cuba and the United States was signed abrogating the Platt Amendment and giving up any further right of intervention in Cuban affairs.

The sole tie left was the naval port of Guantanamo which the Cubans were very glad to have maintained and even strengthened. …

In transmitting the new treaty with Cuba to the Senate for its approval, President Roosevelt declared: “the definite policy of the United States from now on is one opposed to armed intervention. …”

A lesser manifestation of the new policy of non-intervention occurred with reference to Haiti. The American marines had been in Haiti ever since 1915 and although President Hoover had made valiant efforts to bring them out, a suitable agreement seemed impossible of achievement.

President Roosevelt cut the Gordian knot by signing an executive agreement with President Borno and in the summer of 1934, two months in advance of the time specified, the last of the marines had quitted Haiti.

… The final step was taken at the Buenos Aires Conference in 1936, called at the suggestion of President Roosevelt for the maintenance of peace. At this conference a protocol relative to non-intervention was signed by all the American republics, reaffirming the principles set forth in the Montevideo convention of 1933, and declaring inadmissible the intervention of any party in the internal or external affairs of any others.’)

(_p. 168: ’up to date the Cardenas administration has been unwilling to make a reasonable settlement for the oil wells which it has confiscated. …

… However … The Mexican Government finally agreed to a settlement for the seizure of agricultural lands by a commission representing both countries.

The commission is still working and a first payment of one million dollars was made by the Mexican government on June 1, 1939.’)

(_pp. 169-70: ’President Roosevelt was so eager to prove the sincerity of his intentions that he traveled to Buenos Aires and personally opened the Conference, pledging the support of the United States unreservedly to the program of continental solidarity and collective security.

The ideal of peace … was enthusiastically received by the Latin American republics. … agreements … were … signed looking towards strengthening the peace machinery of the continent …

… The Good Neighbor policy is thus shown to be a new world policy … which gives leave to hope that civilized states may live together peaceably with their mutual relations governed by law and justice instead of by power and force.

It has been met with wide approval in Latin America as evidenced by the increased cordiality shown towards the United States. …

Perhaps the most sane and realistic a summarization of the Good Neighbor policy as has been made was given by Assistant Secretary of State Adolf A. Berle, Jr., who served as one of the delegates at the Pan American Conference of Lima.

Speaking before the Academy of Political Science in New York, May 3, 1939, he declared:

“… In sordid fact, it is more advantageous to live at peace, to cooperate in international relations, and to open trade channels, than it is to conquer, to seize territory, and to govern an unwilling population.”

… The great powers within [the region] appear to have learned the lesson of self-restraint“’)

CH 14/6/40 ^{(‘commission report submitted in April finally published’)} “Gasoline price fixing opposed: Report finds consumer goods safeguarded: Gov’t should not compete with ‘own people’ in oil industry” Calgary Herald (14 June 1940): 1-3, 11

McGillivray & Lipsett 1940_pp. 248-51 ^{(recommendations of brilliant Royal Commission investigating US control of AB regulator)} Justice Alexander A. McGillivray and Major L.R. Lipsett Alberta’s Oil Industry: The report of a Royal Commission appointed by the Government of the Province of Alberta under the Public Inquiries Act to inquire into matters connected with petroleum and petroleum products Calgary: Imperial Oil 1940

(_pp. 248-51: ’We think the following points may be emphasized in connection with what we have said on the subject of Conservation and Proration in Alberta.

1. That the ideal in Conservation is attained only under unit operation. …

4. That in a field of divided ownership Conservation cannot as a practical matter be disassociated from the idea of economic equilibrium and the idea of equity. …

6. That a legislative enactment in respect to Conservation and Proration should give recognition to the following:

(a) That a Conservation and Proration body should not be given unlimited power …

(e) That provision should be made by the Legislature that everyone who may be prejudicially affected by an order of the Board shall have opportunity of being heard before that order be made. …

(g) That the Legislature should provide that the rulings of the Board should be the subject of appeal to the courts …

(i) That the rules of procedure leading to such an appeal should be provided for. …

12. That the government, as guardians of the public interest, should keep a watchful eye upon the activities of the industry in all its branches.

13. That this may best be done by reconstituting the present Conservation and Proration Board, by providing for its freedom from political interference, by providing for its close contact with industry, and by providing for performance by the Board of the following added duties over and above those that have to do with Conservation and Proration: …

(c) That from this starting point the Board should accumulate, preserve and produce on request, any data as to the Turner Valley oil field and as to any other part of the Province, which can reasonably be expected to be of interest to those directly or indirectly concerned with the petroleum industry.

(d) That the Board should be required to be at all times fully informed as to every branch of the petroleum industry …

(g) That the Board be required to be familiar with the cost and profit performance and the price spreads in respect of all branches of the industry. …

(i) That the Board should be required to be informed and able to report upon tax evasion’)

Breen 1993_p. 187 ^{(‘McGillivray’s untimely death’)} David H. Breen Alberta’s Petroleum Industry and the Conservation Board Edmonton: University of Alberta and the Energy Resources Conservation Board 1993↩︎

Pollock 1981 ^{{neglects to mention 100,000 troops getting drilled or Republican leader Wilkie}} _pp. 205 ^{(‘haste of entente w/ Canada suggests agreement’s other than what’s called for in its specific provisions’)}_, 205-7 ^{(‘FDR rejected Churchill’s pleas & used WLMK as a channel for discussions on the unpleasant issue’)}_{, 207-8, 210-11} ^{(‘Secretary of State requested someone be sent for secret discussions w/ FDR; no record of the talks could be located in US archives; president hadn’t been candid w/ Canadians’)}_, 211-13 ^{(‘Canadians cont’d to press for immediate military staff discussions w/ US; Roosevelt gave permission 3 July’)}_, 214-16 ^{(’FDR requested WLMK visit him, WLMK readily agreed; Roosevelt appeared “most anxious to get quid pro quo for giving destroyers w/o consulting Congress”, WLMK readily agreed; FDR wrote 110-word text after church’)}_, n1+204 ^{(Ogdensburg Agreement’s ‘delightfully brief text’; military officials met 8 days later in Ottawa)}_{, 213-14, 217} ^{(‘in subsequent cable to Roosevelt, Churchill tried to avoid appearance of being loser in unequal trade’)}_, 219 ^{(’Like a magician working with mirrors, Roosevelt hid the reality of his aims with a series of plausible actions’)} Fred E. Pollock “Roosevelt, the Ogdensburg Agreement, and the British fleet: All done with mirrors” Diplomatic History v5#3 (July 1981): 203-19

(_{p. 205 {emphasis added}}: ‘The haste with which this entente with Canada was arranged suggests that the agreement was other than what was called for in its specific provisions.’)

(_pp. 205-7: ’Churchill, in his first message as prime minister to Roosevelt … asked for aircraft and forty or fifty destroyers so that Britain could continue the struggle.

He suggested that the British might borrow the destroyers until they could complete the construction of new ships.

… Roosevelt … rejected Churchill’s plea for aid. … Churchill responded to the rejection with a renewed plea … Once again Roosevelt put off the request, labeling public opinion and Congress as the villains.

… Rather than reply directly to Churchill’s message, Roosevelt worked through the Canadian government to convince the British to transfer their fleet to the Western Hemisphere, specifically Canada and the United States.

Roosevelt and Prime Minister King had assiduously cultivated each other, and largely through those contacts, relations between the United States and Canada improved during the years prior to the war.

Their special relationship enabled Roosevelt to use the Canadians as a channel for discussions on the unpleasant issue of the disposition of the British fleet.’)

(_{pp. 207-8, 210-11}: ’On 24 May, Secretary of State Cordell Hull called King and requested that someone be sent for secret discussions with the president.

The next day Hugh Keenleyside, a first secretary in the Department of External Affairs and a trusted adviser to King, arrived in Washington and met immediately with Roosevelt and Hull.

… No record of the talks could be located in the U.S. archives.

… As the meeting broke up, the president remarked that he did not feel he could present this argument to Churchill but hoped that Canadian government officials would “make common and very strong representation along these lines.”

The president had not been candid with the Canadians, for he continued to pressure the British on the fleet’s destiny.

The very day he conferred with Keenleyside, he also spoke with Lord Lothian, and the two repeated the same dialogue concerning the fleet.

Disingenuously, Roosevelt blamed the Canadians when he opposed relocating the British government-in-exile in Canada … the president insisted that “Downing Street” (the British government), as well as the British monarch, stay out of Canada.

After reading Keenleyside’s report, King backed away from his new role as an intermediary.

Rather than immediately repeat the contents of the president’s disquieting message to Churchill, he again sent Keenleyside to the White House, hoping that Roosevelt and Hull would change their posture on the fleet.

But in a 29 May meeting the Americans reiterated their stance, and King passed the grim news on to Churchill’)

(_pp. 211-13: ’Early in June, Roosevelt moved toward closer cooperation with Canada. He appointed J.P. Moffat minister to Ottawa and instructed the career diplomat to restate U.S. proposals regarding the fleet.

On 14 June King and Moffat discussed Canada’s role in the war … Two days later … Moffat … again met with the prime minister …

The next day, 17 June, the Canadians formally suggested that military start talks begin between Canada and the United States.

… the Canadians continued to press for immediate military staff discussions with the United States …

On 29 June, Moffat met with two Canadian ministers …

The Canadians went beyond the fleet issue and requested military equipment, describing both general and specific problems that hampered their war effort.

They also asked if the United States could rent, acquire, or purchase lands in the West Indies or Newfoundland and develop them as American air bases.

Moffat gave no reply … But on 3 July, Roosevelt … gave permission to initiate such discussions, although the talks were to remain secret …

Two days of exploratory, secret staff talks began in Washington on 11 July. …

No … issue of substance emerged, and no conclusions were reached. Yet, within six weeks President Roosevelt and Prime Minister King met at Ogdensburg and announced the formation of the PJBD.

That Canadian-American defense arrangement came not from the staff talks but from changes in the Anglo-American defense posture.’)

(_pp. 214-16: ’King received a telephone call from the president in which Roosevelt requested that the prime minister visit him the following evening at Ogdensburg, New York … King readily agreed.

… Roosevelt appeared “most anxious to meet the British and get a quid pro quo for giving destroyers without consulting Congress …”

… King asked what importance Roosevelt had attached to the word “permanent.”

The president replied that it would apply not only to the present situation but also to future Continental defense.

The prime minister readily agreed that the board should be permanent. …

King approved the leasing of British bases …

The Canadian prime minister opposed the sale or lease of bases in Canada to the United States but “would be ready to work out matters of facilities,” where the Americans would be granted access …

To avoid Canadian opposition to the American presence, the facilities would be operated under the jurisdiction of Canada’s Department of National Defence.

The next morning, following a Sunday military church service … The president then wrote out for the press a statement announcing the Ogdensburg Agreement, which established the PJBD.’)

(_{n. 1+p. 204}: ’The text of the [Ogdensburg Agreement] is delightfully brief:

The Prime Minister and the President have discussed the mutual problem of defense in relation to the safety of Canada and the United States.

It has been agreed that a Permanent Joint Board on Defense shall be set up at once by the two countries.

This Permanent Joint Board on Defense shall commence immediate studies relating to sea, land and air problems including personnel and material.

It will consider in the broad sense the defense of the north half of the Western Hemisphere.

The Permanent Joint Board on Defense will consist of four or five members from each country, most of them from the services. It will meet shortly.

… Eight days after the Ogdensburg Agreement was issued, members from the two countries assembled at the Canadian capital, Ottawa, for their first meeting.’)

(_{pp. 213-14, 217}: ’Roosevelt continued to insist on assurances that the fleet would be part of any agreement between the two nations, and on 13 August for the first time personally requested a guarantee from the [British] prime minister …

The president agreed that Churchill did not have to issue a public statement but could simply reiterate the statement he made to Parliament on 4 June.

At the same time Roosevelt informed Churchill of the possibility of providing the British with the destroyers and other materials that the prime minister had requested if, in return, the British permitted the United States to lease or purchase land in the Western Hemisphere for naval or air bases. …

… Roosevelt’s willingness to deliver the destroyers, combined with his insistence on a statement on the fleet, forced a quick, positive response from Churchill. …

… In an address to Parliament on 20 August, he tried to avert a confrontation with the United States … he announced the British government’s intention to provide the United States with facilities for naval and air bases in the Western Hemisphere.

And in a subsequent cable to Roosevelt, Churchill tried to avoid the appearance of being the loser in an unequal trade (“I had not contemplated anything in the nature of a contract, bargain, or sale between us.”)’)

(_p. 219: ’Like a magician working with mirrors, Roosevelt hid the reality of his aims with a series of plausible actions.

Those who argue that historians can deduce motives from the public statements of leaders are not proven wrong—the president consistently brought up the issue of the disposition of the British fleet.

But with Franklin Roosevelt, who so carefully kept his own counsel, actions must guide us to the words that count.’)

Shogun 1999_pp. 1-2 ^{(Senator Moynihan: FDR “actually subverted the law” & “was clearly subject to impeachment”)} Los Angeles Times national political correspondent Robert Shogun “Paving the road to Kosovo” preface to paperback edition of Hard Bargain: How FDR twisted Churchill’s arm, evaded the law, and changed the role of the American presidency (1995; New York: Scribner 1999)

(_pp. 1-2: ’Roosevelt’s flouting of constitutional principles was so flagrant that many years later Senator Patrick Moynihan contented that Roosevelt, “actually subverted the law” and “was clearly subject to impeachment.”

But the president suffered no legal retribution. Instead, his action established a precedent for unilateral presidential interventionism abroad, which having survived and flourished through wars hot and cold manifested itself most recently in the bombs that rained down on Yugoslavia in the spring of 1999.

Traveling the road to Kosovo that Roosevelt paved. Americans have spilled blood in every corner of the globe in the last half of the twentieth century.

But not once during the bellicose era since World War II has a US president shown enough respect for the Constitution to ask Congress for a declaration of war.’)

Shogun 1995b ^{(‘FDR’s chief resource was what you might call industrial strength deviousness’)} Los Angeles Times national political correspondent Robert Shogun “FDR and Winston Churchill” C-Span (14 September 1995): 53 mins [remarks about his recent book at the Woman’s National Democratic Club]

(_10:04-12:03: “This is … the story of the first significant achievement of one of history’s most successful collaborations: the partnership between Roosevelt and Churchill.

But in broader terms it is a narrative about how a great nation changed its role in the world from a remote bystander to that of a dominating power.

Fundamentally though, it is a story about how Franklin Roosevelt confronted great national crisis at the helm of a bitterly divided nation and led it down a path he chose for it.

So my aim in the book is to cast some light on presidential leadership. … So I thought I would look back at the story of the most successful political practitioner we’ve ever had in America … to find out just how he did it.

It is what they call a cautionary tale.

I found that the way Franklin Roosevelt carried this out was not really the way you would want to see it in your civics [text]books …

What I found … is that his chief resource here was what you might call industrial strength deviousness. And this was no accident, it was calculating and he saw no reason to feel ashamed.“)

Shogun 1995a Robert Shogun Hard Bargain: How FDR twisted Churchill’s arm, evaded the law, and changed the role of the American presidency New York: Scribner 1995

Granatstein 1967 ^{(’resentment & disgust over Ogdensburg Agreement found outlet thru ill-advised Conservative Party leaders’)} Jack L. Granatstein “The Conservative Party and the Ogdensburg Agreement” International Journal v22#1 (March 1967): 73-76

(_pp. 73-76: ’There was undoubtedly an undercurrent of resentment and even disgust at the Agreement. This feeling found its outlet, both privately and publicly through the leaders of the Conservative Party.

The Conservative Party was near death in the summer of 1940. … The leader of the party at this low point in its history was Richard B. Hanson of Fredericton. …

Parliament was out of session when Hanson heard the announcement of the signing of the Ogdensburg Agreement on the radio at his home.

“I got quite worked up about the whole thing”, he wrote … “so went to Ottawa Monday night [August 19]. …

… We found out that the whole thing was Roosevelt’s idea to … give him a quid pro quo for anything he might do with Great Britain …”

… former Prime Minister and the Conservative leader in the Senate … [Arthur] Meighen’s immediate reaction … “Really I lost my breakfast when I read the account this morning and gazed on the disgusting picture of these potentates posing …”

… the Senator wrote in a second letter to his former subordinate, “I personally do not accept … that this Conference business is entirely the idea of Mr. Roosevelt. It is too much in line with Mr. King’s life long inclinations. …”

In its general tendency though, Meighen added, “it is … something the Canadian people do not want.”

… Saturday Night wrote … “Your difficulty lies in the fact that while there is an immense amount of feeling in the Conservative party which corresponds exactly to what you said there is also a widespread fear of expressing that feeling at this moment on account of possible international repercussions.”

Certainly the [Conservative Party leader’s] speech was ill-advised.[*]

… To the Conservative Party … Ogdensburg was just another Liberal attempt to abandon the Empire in preference to the United States.’)

[*] Indeed. On Alberta Chief Justice Alexander McGillivray’s 12 December 1940 ‘heart attack’ (the former Alberta Conservative Party leader had recently led Royal Commission investigating foreign-controlled Alberta o&g regulator), see Breen 1993_p. 187; on first non-American chair of Alberta o&g regulator Dr. Edward Boomer’s 27 October 1945 ‘heart attack’ (4 days after signing deal with Shell), see Breen 1993_p. 229; on Italian state oil founder Enrico Mattei’s 27 October 1962 assassination (on the anniversary of Dr. Boomer’s ‘heart attack’, despite the ongoing Cuban Missile Crisis), see Wolfe-Hunnicutt 2021_pp. 76-78; on the 19 October 1984 plane crash that killed Alberta opposition leader Grant Notley (father of current opposition leader, Rachel Notley), see CP 22/10/84 + CP 27/2/85; on Alberta Chief Justice William McGillivray’s sudden death despite good health (almost 44 years to the day of his father’s ‘heart attack’), see CH 17/12/84 + LASA 2004/5; on plane crash almost exactly 32 years after Notley’s that killed former premier Jim Prentice (recently co-leader with floor-crossing current premier, Danielle Smith), see Global News 26/4/18 + McConnell 2018; on the sudden passing in June 2023 of Reclaim Alberta + Alberta Liabilities Disclosure Project board member, Thomas Schneider, see Schneider Obituary 2023; on the August 2023 assassination of CIA asset and Ecuadorian presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio, see Grayzone 20/8/23 + Murray 2023. I take the last two (and the ways they were brought to my attention) as fair warning against continuing my research and publishing, but in defense of the public interest of Albertans and in the hope of us all one day living independent of the Americans, I remain among those historian Jack Granatstein counted as fools:

“Some people realized [Ogdensburg] marked the shift of Canada from a British Dominion to Canada as an American protectorate … but … only the very foolish felt obliged to say so in public.”

Jack L. Granatstein “Getting on with the Americans: Changing Canadian perceptions of the United States, 1939-1945” Canadian Review of American Studies v5#1 (March 1974) p. 8

Breen 1993_pp. 187 ^{(McGillivray I)}_, 229 ^(Boomer) David H. Breen Alberta’s Petroleum Industry and the Conservation Board Edmonton: University of Alberta and the Energy Resources Conservation Board 1993

Wolfe-Hunnicutt 2021_pp. 76-78 ^(Mattei) Brandon Wolfe-Hunnicutt The Paranoid Style in American Diplomacy: Oil and Arab nationalism in Iraq Stanford: Stanford University 2021

CP 22/10/84 ^{(Notley crash)} Canadian Press “Prisoner hailed as hero in Notley crash” Globe and Mail (22 October 1984): A5

CP 27/2/85 ^{(Notley inquiry)} Canadian Press “Notley’s pilot was suffering from too little sleep: report” Globe and Mail (27 February 1985): A4

CH 17/12/84 ^{(McGillivray II ‘died in sleep despite good health’)} Blair Shewchuk “Alberta’s chief justice dead at 66” Calgary Herald (17 December 1984): A1

LASA 2004/5 ^{(reminder after Iraq/NI 51-101: ‘McGillivray II’s death—following in father’s footsteps—came as a great shock to AB legal community’)} Brenda McCafferty “From the vault: Following in father’s footsteps” Legal Archives Society of Alberta Architypes v13#2 (Winter 2004/2005): 3

Global News 26/4/18 ^{(Prentice investigation)} Caley Gibson, Reid Fiest and Slav Kornik “No determination on cause of Prentice plane crash: Transportation Safety Board” Global News (26 April 2018)

McConnell 2018 ^{(Prentice crash raises questions about aviation regulation)} National Chair of the Canadian Federal Pilots Association Captain Greg McConnell “Action speaks louder than words: Transport Canada is failing us all” Edmonton Journal (3 May 2018): A10

Grayzone 20/8/23 ^{(Ecuador assassination)} “Who killed Ecuador’s Fernando Villavicencio?” Grayzone (20 August 2023): 37mins

Murray 2023 ^{(assassinated’s role w/ CIA)} Former British Ambassador Craig Murray “When a CIA asset becomes a CIA liability” (10 August 2023)

Schneider Obituary 2023 ^{(hit head & died)} “Thomas Ervin Schneider: 1964-2023” (3 June 2023) Erb & Good Family Funeral Home (14 June 2023)

↩︎

Round Table 1940a_pp. 894-902 ^{(‘reorganisation of WLMK’s <1month-old cabinet hastened by tragic death of the Minister of National Defence in an aeroplane accident 10Jun`40; WLMK announced immediate introduction of Bill to confer upon Gov special emergency powers 18Jun`40, Gov then proceeded to make use of the drastic powers conferred on it which would’ve been deemed unthinkable a few months ago; Minister of Finance Colonel Ralston submitted federal budget 24Jun`40, imposing by far severest burden of taxation in Cdn history’)</sup><sub>, 905-6</sub> <sup>(‘Earl of Athlone assumed office as Governor-General & arrived in Canada 19Jun`40, having served “brilliantly successful” as GG in S. Africa’)} “Canada: I. A new war effort” Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs v30#120 (July 1940): 893-906

(_pp. 894-902: ’The new Federal Parliament, elected on March 26, assembled for its first session on May 16 under the shadow of the German Blitzkrieg which had been launched a week previously …

… a reorganisation of his Cabinet … was hastened by the tragic death of Mr. Norman Rogers, the Minister of National Defence, in an aeroplane accident on June 10.

It involved prolonged negotiations and was not completed until July 8, when Mr. Mackenzie King was able to announce the personnel of his reorganised Cabinet to the House of Commons.

… The Ministry of National Revenue, vacated by Mr. Ilsley, has been given to a parliamentary novice, Colonel Gibson of Hamilton … although he only entered Parliament four months ago …

… Accordingly on June 18 Mr. Mackenzie King announced the immediate introduction of a Bill to confer upon the Government special emergency powers for the mobilisation of all the human and material resources of the Dominion.

He intimated also that one of its prime features would be a national registration of all citizens of Canada over the age of 16 …

The Government then proceeded to make use of the drastic powers conferred on it and to take measures for a regimentation of national life which would have been deemed unthinkable a few months ago. …

… The scheme of national registration, which is under the direction of the Ministry of National War Services, will begin to operate about August 19 …

The Federal budget, which Colonel Ralston, then Minister of Finance, presented to Parliament on June 24 imposed upon the Canadian people by far the severest burden of taxation in their history.’)

(_pp. 905-6: ’The fact that the Earl of Athlone was assuming office as Governor-General at a time when the very fate of the Empire was at stake naturally heightened public interest in his appointment and in his arrival in Canada on June 19.

It was generally recalled that the new Governor-General was chosen to succeed H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught in 1916, but was prevented from doing so by the pressure of war duties at home.

That the new Governor-General is an uncle of His Majesty and a brother of the Queen Mother, and that his Consort is a granddaughter of the great Queen in whose reign Canada came into being, constitutes a link with the past of the Empire which could not but appeal to the imagination.

… His Excellency was, as the Toronto Globe and Mail expressed it, “brilliantly successful as Governor-General of the Union of South Africa during a period of great difficulty”.’)

Round Table 1940b_pp. 906-7 ^{(’Alberta insolvency caused Royal Commission on fed-prov relations, submitted to Parliament 16May`40; instructions to make factual report resembled potential buyer’s wish list of data)}_, 908 ^{(‘Supreme Court of Canada Justice Thibaudeau Rinfret & then the Chairman, Chief Justice of Ontario Newton Rowell, were both forced to retire on account of illness’)} “Canada: II. The Rowell-Sirois report” Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs v30#120 (July 1940): 906-914

(_pp. 906-7: ’after two and a half years of work … The Report of the Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations … frequently tagged as “The Fathers of Re-Confederation” … was submitted to Parliament on May 16, 1940 …

The development immediately responsible was the financial difficulties of the three Prairie Provinces.

These difficulties led to an investigation in the spring of 1937 by the Bank of Canada at the invitation of the three Prairie Governments and the Dominion Government.

… The Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations was consequently appointed in August 1937, with instructions to make a factual report on:

the constitutional allocation of revenue sources and governmental burdens …

the character and amount of taxes collected from the people of Canada …

public expenditures and public debts in general …

Dominion subsidies and grants to provincial governments.’)

Colby & Dennett 1995_p. 96 ^{(‘FDR ordered economic program begin June 28’)} Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennett Thy Will Be Done: The conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and evangelism in the age of oil New York: Harpercollins 1995↩︎

Round Table 1941b_pp. 347-53 ^{(‘since small & relatively weak people living alongside a great & powerful people necessarily devotes much time to study & observation of its large neighbour, Canadians probably understand Americans better than Americans understand Canadians. This situation has its dangers. It will enable Canadians to grasp in advance, and sympathetically, the kind of proposals the Americans are likely to make, and they will be prepared to be tolerant towards the foibles of their opposite numbers’)}_, 356-57 ^{(‘a man cannot serve two masters. Nor can a nation. Canada is a nation which has a kind of split personality and there is only one road of healing for her’)} “Canada: II. The Canadian-American Defence Agreement and its significance” Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs v31#122 (January 1941): 347-57

(_pp. 347-53: ’Two men had met there and after some friendly talk had given out a short statement that bids fair to prove one of the great documents of history.

The Ogdensburg agreement of August last … has in it potentialities which may profoundly affect the fates not only of the two peoples immediately concerned but of their kindred throughout the world.

Posterity may come to associate it with the other great events that have marked the attractions and repulsions of the English-speaking peoples. …

…the British Empire is vast in total area and population, but its white population is relatively small and, apart from the concentration in the British Isles, scattered. …

… A few months ago any suggestion that the United States would accept a central role in world affairs would have been merely wishful thinking. …

But signs are not wanting of unlooked-for and unhoped-for occurrences. …

… Its large sum of resources, particularly its food and minerals … its huge area, even though much of that be wilderness, above all the energy of its people and their capacity for organisation, give it a place in world affairs more prominent than the political experience, or indeed the desires, of its citizens would warrant.

… A very long war into which the United States eventually entered [WWII] … might well burn out American isolationism entirely, but it would almost certainly replace it with Imperialism.

… There is … an entire absence in Canada of fear of the United States. …

Canadian familiarity with American ways of living and thinking makes for a degree of co-operation in common projects that it would be difficult to achieve between other peoples.

Even on the mechanical level engineering standards and gauges are the same and the ready acceptance of the machine age is the same …

Since a small and relatively weak people living alongside a great and powerful people necessarily devotes much time to study and observation of its large neighbour, Canadians probably understand Americans better than Americans understand Canadians.

This situation has its dangers.

It will enable Canadians to grasp in advance, and sympathetically, the kind of proposals the Americans are likely to make, and they will be prepared to be tolerant towards the foibles of their opposite numbers.’)

(_pp. 356-57: ’The situation may be put in this way: Canada … has now entered into a most important military relationship with another great Power. …

A man cannot serve two masters. Nor can a nation. …

… The Defence Agreement may not be a treaty, but it is likely to prove more enduring than any treaty. …

Canada is a nation which has a kind of split personality and there is only one road of healing for her.’)

Boychuk 2023d_nn. 38-39 ^{(FDR @ Ogdensburg: “largest gathering of American troops since the close of the Civil War”)} Regan Boychuk “Canada is an American protectorate & Alberta is an imperial bezzle: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part five” York University Capital-as-Power blog (22 July 2023)

Round Table 1941a_{pp. 340, 344} ^{(’founding father of Round Table always declared milking cows one of his best skills’)}_, 341, 345 ^{(‘reaped a comfortable income from virtual monopoly on exchange business of leading bankers, who greatly trusted & continually sought his counsel – as did important London & NYC financiers’)}_, 342-45 ^{(‘AJG’s great political hero was his friend & honorary member of Glazebrook family, Lord Milner, who sent Phillip Kerr + Lionel Curtis to Canada in summer of 1910 to investigate political conditions for Imperial Federation; when Round Table movement was launched in Canada, Glazebrook became 1 of its most active spirits’)} “Canada: I. Arthur James Glazebrook” Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs v31#122 (January 1941): 340-47

(_{pp. 340, 344}: ’he could fairly claim to be one of … founding fathers … of this review …

… Arthur Glazebrook was by temperament an aristocrat …

Arthur Glazebrook always declared … that skill in milking cows was in reality one of his best accomplishments.’)

(_{pp. 341, 345}: ’Possessing the confidence of the leading bankers of Toronto, he had virtually a monopoly of their exchange business for many years and reaped a comfortable income from his labours.

… He was greatly trusted by leading bankers of Canada, who continually sought his counsel about monetary and financial problems, and there were also important financiers in London and New York who placed great reliance upon his judgment about Canadian affairs.’)

(_pp. 342-45: ’in the summer of 1910 the late Lord Lothian (then Philip Kerr) and Mr. Lionel Curtis arrived in Canada for the purpose of investigating political conditions in the Dominion and of gaining in particular some insight into the Canadian viewpoint upon the subject of Imperial relations.

They had just seen the finish of the task of unifying South Africa and they were anxious to discover what were the prospects of achieving the more ambitious project of Imperial Federation.

They came to Glazebrook with a warm letter of introduction from Lord Milner, who as the result of a close friendship formed with Canon Glazebrook, Arthur’s elder brother, during their Oxford days, had long ranked as a sort of honorary member of the whole Glazebrook family …

Not only did Arthur Glazebrook constitute himself their guide and cicerone in the plans which were laid for the exploration of Canadian sentiment during their tour, but when the Round Table movement was launched, he became one of its most active spirits in Canada. …

By many of his Canadian friends he was counted a perfervid Imperialist, and if this description implied a desire for the firmer co-ordination of the political and economic activities of the Commonwealth he would have acknowledged its accuracy …

… His great political hero was his friend, Lord Milner, with whom he kept up a regular correspondence, and he always counted it one of the happiest experiences of his life when in the summer of 1912 Milner paid a visit to Canada and, after staying as his guest in Toronto, invited him to be his companion on a speech-making tour which took him to most of the important cities of Canada.

… Through his friendship with Lord Milner and others he had at one time a wide acquaintance among the prominent figures in British public life, and it is well known to his intimates that on numerous occasions British ministers, anxious to secure reliable information about certain Canadian affairs through unofficial channels, had recourse to Glazebrook.’)

↩︎

Zinn 1980_pp. 402-3 ^{(‘Japan provoked into attacking Pearl Harbour, which US anticipated; US reassured France it could keep empire after WWII’)} Howard Zinn “A people’s war?” ch16 in A People’s History of the United States: 1492-present (New York: Harper & Row 1980): 398-434

(_pp. 402-3: ’One of the judges in the Tokyo War Crimes Trial after World War II, Radhabinod Pal, dissented from the general verdicts against Japanese officials and argued that the United States had clearly provoked the war with Japan and expected Japan to act.

Richard Minear (Victors’ Justice) sums up Pal’s view of the embargoes on scrap iron and oil, that “these measures were a clear and potent threat to Japan’s very existence.”

The records show that a White House conference two weeks before Pearl Harbor anticipated a war and discussed how it should be justified.

A State Department memorandum on Japanese expansion, a year before Pearl Harbor, did not talk of the independence of China or the principle of self-determination. It said:

… our general diplomatic and strategic position would be considerably weakened by our loss of Chinese, Indian and South Seas markets (and by our loss of much of the Japanese market for our goods, as Japan would become more and more self-sufficient) as well as by insurmountable restrictions upon our access to the rubber, tin, jute, and other vital materials of the Asian and Oceanic regions.

Once joined with England and Russia in the war (Germany and Italy declared war on the United States right after Pearl Harbor), did the behavior of the United States show that her war aims were humanitarian, or centered on power and profit?

Was she fighting the war to end the control by some nations over others or to make sure the controlling nations were friends of the United States?

In August 1941, Roosevelt and Churchill met off the coast of Newfoundland and released to the world the Atlantic Charter, setting forth noble goals for the postwar world, saying their countries “seek no aggrandizement, territorial or other,” and that they respected “the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live.”

The Charter was celebrated as declaring the right of nations to self-determination.

Two weeks before the Atlantic Charter, however, the US Acting Secretary of State, Sumner Welles, had assured the French government that they could keep their empire intact after the end of the war:

“This Government, mindful of its traditional friendship for France, has deeply sympathized with the desire of the French people to maintain their territories and to preserve them intact.”

The Department of Defense history of Vietnam (The Pentagon Papers) itself pointed to what it called an “ambivalent” policy toward Indochina, noting that “in the Atlantic Charter and other pronouncements, the US proclaimed support for national self-determination and independence” but also “early in the war repeatedly expressed or implied to the French an intention to restore to France its overseas empire after the war.”

In late 1942, Roosevelt’s personal representative assured French General Henri Giraud: “It is thoroughly understood that French sovereignty will be re-established as soon as possible throughout all the territory, metropolitan or colonial, over which flew the French flag in 1939.”

(These pages, like the others in the Pentagon Papers, are marked “TOP SECRET-Sensitive.”)

By 1945 the “ambivalent” attitude was gone.

In May, Truman assured the French he did not question her “sovereignty over Indochina.”

That fall, the United States urged Nationalist China, put temporarily in charge of the northern part of Indochina by the Potsdam Conference, to turn it over to the French, despite the obvious desire of the Vietnamese for independence.

That was a favor for the French government. But what about the United States’ own imperial ambitions during the war?

What about the “aggrandizement, territorial or other” that Roosevelt had renounced in the Atlantic Charter?’)

Mossadegh 1951 ^{(Mossadegh built considerable political strength, largely based on his call to nationalize British-owned oil Co. In March 1951 the Majles passed his oil-nationalization act)} Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh “Complaint of failure by the Iranian Government to comply with provisional measures indicated by the International Court of Justice in the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company case (5/2357) (continued)” United Nations Security Council Official Records 560^th meeting S/PV.560 (15 October 1951): 29pp

NYT 8/19/53 ^{(‘US Ambassador returned from 2 month vacation yesterday; Iran’s Tudeh Party made following demands…’)} Kennett Love “Extremist rioters in Tehran fought by police and army: Government intensifies search for Zahedi, who lays claim to Iran rule: Fleeing Shah and Queen arrive in Rome” New York Times (19 August 1953): 1, 6

(Tehran Aug. 18—’The Communists are apparently feeling their strength in the increasing popular disorders.

The Tudeh morning paper Shojaat published a formal statement by the Central Committee of Tudeh warning the Government to halt appeasement of the Court and of the “Anglo-American imperialists.”

It made the following demands:

Elimination of all vestiges of the monarchy and the establishment of a democratic republic.

Eradication of all foreign colonizing influences, chiefly by expulsion of the United States Military Advisory Mission, the United States Point Four development mission, “interventionist” American diplomats and the closure of all American consulates and other organizations as well as abrogation of all military and other accords.

Abolition of martial law and the return of freedom of action to the Tudeh party (nominally outlawed).

Formation of a united front by Tudeh and all other “anti-colonial organizations.”

… United States Ambassador Loy M. Henderson … returned only yesterday from a two-month vacation.’)

Clairmont 2010_pp. 28-31 ^{(‘ousting of Iranian democracy boosted US imperial hegemony, but also marked irreversible eclipse of British imperialism’’)} Frederic F. Clairmont BP: The unfinished crimes and plunder of Anglo-American imperialism Atlanta: Clear Day 2010

(_pp. 28-30: ’Mossadeq was arrested … and hauled before a military tribunal.

Treated as a traitor and a criminal, he was tortured and kept in solitary confinement until 21 December.

His prison term was subsequently extended to three years of incarceration followed by house arrest until his death in 1967. …

What followed in Iran was nothing short of an inferno.

The CIA had joined forces with Israel’s Mossad intelligence service that would go on to become one of the founders and manipulators of the Savak secret police force in Iran.

It should be noted that Savak as conceived by Mossad and the CIA was a force that combined the institutional attributes of the Nazi Gestapo secret police and the SS military fighting units.

Thousands were deported, butchered and disappeared. That was, however, a non-issue for the yellow corporate press.

The repression bore striking similarities to Pinochet’s Chile, save that it was on a far vaster scale.

The entire nation was blanketed by Savak, which became the highest-paid and most privileged thugs of the Shah’s Anglo-American-dominated empire.

Israeli premier David Ben Gurion ecstatically proclaimed that Israel would henceforth never cease to enjoy easy access to inexhaustible and cheap supplies of oil. …

Savak became the training ground for mass murderers and torturers.

Training camps were swiftly set up within Iran and in Israel as well as in that institution of mass genocide that was the School of the Americas in Panama.

Genocide Inc. in Iran had now been globalized.

… The ousting of Iranian democracy boosted US imperial hegemony. It would ensure US imperial rule but it also marked the irreversible eclipse of British imperialism’)

Provost & Kennard 2023 ^{(‘as European empires crumbled, power structures that had dominated the world for centuries were up for renegotiation. Yet instead of a rebirth for democracy, what emerged was a silent coup – namely, the unstoppable rise of global corporate power. Exposing the origins of this epic power grab as well as its present-day consequences, Silent Coup is the result of two investigative journalist’s reports from 30 countries around the world’)} Claire Provost and Matt Kennard Silent Coup: How corporations overthrew democracy London: Bloomsbury Academic 2023

Bratt & Foster 2020_{pp. 20 + n7} ^{(‘series of 10 confidential meetings during Dec`66’)}_, 22 ^{(‘premier Manning concluded public support + Mannix money meant future could well belong to Lougheed’)}_, 22-23 ^{(’not a single media reference in > half century’)} Duane Bratt and Bruce Foster “The attempted takeover of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta” Alberta History v68#2 (Spring 2020): 20-26

(_{p. 20 + n7}: ‘The Proposal was the end result of a series of ten confidential meetings held in Edmonton and Calgary during December, 1966. … the entire 1966 document has not been made public’)

(_p. 22: ‘Not lost on Premier Manning was the fact that the Progressive Conservative party under Lougheed, despite having no seats in the legislature, was starting to attract public support, as well as money, from some of the province’s wealthiest residents, such as Calgary’s powerful Mannix family. “Following the money” led the Mannings to conclude that, without a merger, the future of conservative politics in Alberta could well belong solely to the Progressive Conservatives.’)

(_pp. 22-23: ’It was remarkable that the secret negotiations never got out into the public domain. There was not a single media reference. …

… even when the document’s details were provided to the Social Credit caucus [who rejected the proposal] and to the senior leadership of the PCs, they were never leaked; neither at the time nor for decades hence.’)

CPLF/CELF ^{(’since inception, major focus has been Annual Research Seminar in Oil & Gas Law (now Energy Law): Papers presented & discussed at Seminar are peer-reviewed & published in the Alberta Law Review’)} Canadian Petroleum Law Foundation (1962-2010)/Canadian Energy Law Foundation (2010-) “History” (no date)

ARLI ^{(‘idea of an Institute, as opposed to a statutory commission, was unique to Alberta at the time of its creation in 1967; model has now been emulated in other parts of Canada and the world’)} Alberta Law Reform Institute “About ARLI” (no date)

(”The idea of an Institute, as opposed to a statutory commission, was unique to Alberta at the time of its creation in 1967.

This arrangement has enhanced the independence, objectivity, and credibility of the Institute. When Institute recommendations are forwarded to the provincial government, they arrive with the status of the body officially charged with law reform activity in the province, and with a background of excellence in research.

This model has now been emulated in other parts of Canada and the world.

ALRI is part of a much bigger network of law reform agencies in Canada, and throughout the common law world, by its membership in the Federation of Law Reform Agencies of Canada and the Commonwealth Association of Law Reform Agencies and its ongoing relationship with the Uniform Law Conference of Canada.

ALRI is governed by a 14-member Board, representing the founding parties and the broader legal community.

The Board appoints a Director as head of the organization.

Funding for the Institute comes primarily from the Department of Justice and the Alberta Law Foundation.

The University of Alberta provides the Institute with office premises and many additional services, including a small annual cash grant.

The Institute has been the catalyst for many changes in the Alberta Legal system.

Many of these changes have been of a systemic nature and have had a significant impact on the life of Albertans.

Recommendations based on thorough research have led to the introduction of the Business Corporations Act“)

Manning 2017 ^{(‘constitutions & MoU’s of Reform Party (1987) + Canadian Alliance (1997) + Conservative Party of Canada (2003) each contain statements remarkably similar to those first put forward in 1966 Alberta Political Proposal’)} Preston Manning “This isn’t the first time Albertans have grappled with uniting the right” Calgary Herald (3 February 2017): A11

(”Recently, John Whittaker, a researcher at the Manning Centre, was given access to a heretofore classified and unpublished document from 1966 entitled An Alberta Political Proposal.
A copy of this document has been posted on our website along with Whittaker’s summation of it and six other related documents.

This 1966 proposal was jointly commissioned by my father, Ernest C. Manning, then premier and leader of Alberta’s long-time Social Credit administration, and Peter Lougheed, who had just become leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta. At the time, the PCs held no seats in the legislature.

… The other documents include the constitutions and memoranda of understanding that created the Reform Party in 1987, the Canadian Alliance in 1997, and the present day Conservative Party of Canada in 2003.

Each contain statements of conservative principles remarkably similar to those first put forward in the 1966 Alberta Political Proposal“)

↩︎

Colby & Dennett 1995_pp. 83-86 ^{(Feb`38: ‘FDR administration preferred to ride out confiscation of oil Co’s provoking Mexican sovereignty’)} Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennett Thy Will Be Done: The conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and evangelism in the age of oil New York: Harpercollins 1995

Pilger 1992_pp. 215-19 ^{(‘CIA Director Colby later wrote ’threat’ posed by Whitlam Gov was 1of3 ‘world crises’ of his career, comparable to`73 Middle East War, when US considered using nuclear weapons’)}_, 221-25 ^{(’modern Australia democracy had been usurped, said the Melbourne Age, by “the right of Kings & Queens to unilaterally appoint Governments”’)}_, 225 ^{(“CIA’s aim was to get rid of a Gov in much more sophisticated & subtle form”; “essence of such intervention is identification of allies who can be rendered more effective, more powerful, & perhaps wiser thru covert assistance”)}_, 230 ^{(‘in 1977, President Carter had sent a personal emissary w/ message that US administration would never again interfere in the domestic political processes of Australia’)} John Pilger “The Coup” ch5 in updated edn. of A Secret Country (1989; London: Vintage 1992):185-238

(_pp. 215-19: ‘[Future Governor-General Sir John] Kerr was an enthusiastic member of the Australian Association for Cultural Freedom, described by Jonathan Kwitny, in his book The Crimes of Patriots, as ’an elite, invitation only group … which in 1967 was exposed in Congress as being founded, funded and generally fun by the CIA’.

In researching his book, Kwitny, a senior journalist with the conservative Wall Street Journal, had unusual access to Kerr.

He spoke to him, once to check the accuracy of what he had written about him, Kwitny wrote:

In the 1960s Kerr helped organize and run (as founding President) the Law Association for Asia and the Western Pacific.

He travelled to the United States to arrange financing for this body from a tax-free group known as the Asia Foundation; that, too, was exposed in Congress as a CIA-established conduit for money and influence. …

… For a man who supposedly understood the nature of the forces ranged against a reformist Labor Government, Whitlam’s naïveté in appointing Kerr was astonishing.

… William Colby, the CIA Director, later wrote that the ‘threat’ posed by the Whitlam Government was one of the three ‘world crises’ of his career, comparable to the Middle East War in 1973, when the United States considered using nuclear weapons.

After Whitlam had threatened in private and in Parliament not to extend the lease of the bases, the CIA made a series of direct moves to get rid of him: that is, to persuade others with shared, vested interests to do the job.

The information for this comes from the highest sources in US intelligence: up to the level of a former Deputy Director and Station Chief.

They are not renegade officers.

They agreed to speak only after being given guarantees of confidentiality, and they have provided detailed briefings on what happened to the Whitlam Government, why it happened and how it happened.’)

(_pp. 221-25: ’On November 10 [1975] Whitlam was told that the acting Director of ASIO, Frank Mahoney (who had been appointed by Whitlam himself) had received a telex message from the ASIO station in Washington which required urgent attention.

‘What is it about?’ Whitlam asked a member of his staff. ‘It’s about you,’ was the reply.

The message said, in effect, that the Prime Minister of Australia was a security risk in his own country.

… Brian Toohey, who first published the message, later met Shackley.

He gained the clear impression that the threats had had the full authority of the Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger.

… For the CIA, December 9 remained a critical date. The agency was certain Whitlam would announce the cancellation of the Pine Gap agreement on that day … this would mean calling the election no later than the week of Remembrance Day, November 11.

If what was about to happen had not been planned, the indiscretions of one Andrew Peacock six weeks earlier would have amounted to an astonishing coincidence.

Peacock, then a member of the Opposition and now its leader, was visiting Indonesia and briefed Government officials there on the current state of the Australian political crisis.

He described in detail the events which were about to take the nation, and presumably himself and his conservative colleagues, by surprise.

A record of the briefing was later read into Australian Hansard. This is an extract:

Whitlam will not agree to hold an election … the Governor-General would be forced to ask Malcolm Fraser to form a Cabinet. But this Cabinet would not be able to get a mandate to govern, because Parliament is controlled by the Labor Party … Fraser is appointed PM, a minute later he asks the Governor-General to dissolve Parliament, following which a general election is to be held.

And that is what happened.

On November 11, the very day Whitlam was to inform Parliament fully about the CIA and American bases in Australia, he was summoned by Kerr from Parliament House and, without warning, sacked.

Kerr’s cunning was such that at the moment he was dismissing the Prime Minister, he had Malcom Fraser hiding in another room.

He had even seen to it that Fraser’s official car was parked where Whitlam would not see it.

With Whitlam off the premises, Fraser emerged and was made caretaker Prime Minister.

… Thus, an unelected official made his arbitrary decision and the legitimate acts of a democracy amounted to nothing.

In modern Australia democracy had been usurped, said the Melbourne Age, by ‘the right of Kings and Queens to unilaterally appoint Governments.’

There are no Kings and Queens in Washington.”)

(_p. 225: ’’The CIA’s aim’, said former CIA officer Victor Marchetti, ‘was to get rid of a Government they did not like and that was not co-operative … it’s a Chile, but in a much more sophisticated and subtle form’.

The sophistication and subtlety were described by the CIA’s former Chief of Clandestine Services, Richard Bissell, in a secret speech. In this passage Bissel portrays the Agency’s ideal foreign agents in ‘destabilisation’ operations:

Covert intervention is usually designed to operate on the internal power balance … to achieve results within at most two or three years …

The essence of such intervention is the identification of allies who can be rendered more effective, more powerful, and perhaps wiser through covert assistance.

Typically these local allies know the source of the assistance but neither they nor the United States could afford to admit to its existence.

Agents for fairly minor and low sensitivity interventions, for instance some covert propaganda and certain economic activities, can be recruited simply with money.

But for the larger and more sensitive interventions, the allies must have their own motivation.

On the whole the Agency has been remarkably successful in finding individuals and instrumentalities with which it could work on this fashion.’)

(_p. 230: ‘it was typical of Whitlam that he should bury the most damning confirmation of this ’onslaught’ in a large, dry book not published until 1985.

In The Whitlam Government, 1972-75, he revealed that … in 1977, President Carter had sent a personal emissary to meet him over a private breakfast …

The crux of Carter’s message was ‘that he respected the democratic rights of the allies of the US, and that the US administration would never again interfere in the domestic political processes of Australia’. (Emphasis added.)’)

Hocking & Cronoa 2022 ^{(1976 Round Table coup in Australia cont.)} Jenny Hocking and Peter Cronoa “The Queen’s Coup” Declassified Australia (11 November 2022)

(’Kerr received the Australian senior legal officers’ opinion on 6 November 1975 and, as he had anticipated, it gave no grounds for using the reserve powers to dismiss Whitlam:

“The mere threat of or indeed the actual rejection of Supply neither calls for the ministry to resign nor compels the Crown’s representative thereupon to intervene.”

The opinion advised Kerr that there was no basis for him to act.

However it seems Kerr, instead of accepting the advice of Australia’s senior legal officers, accepted the advice of the Palace and elected to intervene as the Palace had advised was certainly valid and would only ‘do it good’.

Five days later Kerr dismissed the Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam and his government, in an unprecedented act of vice-regal intervention.

Just four months after the dismissal, in March 1976, Prince Charles sent a long hand-written letter to his confidante Sir John Kerr.

In it Charles let the besieged governor-general know that he fully supported Kerr’s dismissal of the Australian government without warning:

“I wanted you to know that I appreciate what you do and admire enormously the way you have performed in your many and varied duties. Please don’t lose heart. What you did last year was right and the courageous thing to do.”’)

Pratt 1976 ^{(`70s capital strike: ‘by exploiting their monopoly veto power, corp’s secured better profits by pushing up price of new energy in Canada’)} Larry Pratt The Tar Sands: Syncrude and the politics of oil Edmonton: Hurtig 1976

Page 1976_p. 246 ^{(‘$600M made available w/o gov’s obtaining corresponding share in control of company’)} Robert Page “The Tar Sands: Syncrude and the Politics of Oil by Larry Pratt” Arctic v29#4 (December 1976): 245-46

(_p. 246: ’This volume shows with disturbing clarity how the oil companies were able to take advantage of the feuds between Ontario and Alberta, and between Ottawa and the provinces.

The lack of expertise in the federal camp made their position difficult when the Atlantic Richfield Company abandoned the tar sands project …

The three remaining partners threatened to abandon the project unless the federal and provincial governments agreed to provide $600 million in equity immediately.

A series of dramatic meetings followed during which, Pratt states, public funds were made available without the governments’ obtaining a corresponding share in the control of the company.’)

ERCB 2013_p. 166 ^{(1982 Lodgepole disaster)} Gordon Jaremko Steward: 75 years of Alberta energy regulation Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board 2013

(_p. 166: ’A sour-gas blowout at Lodgepole, southwest of Edmonton, kills two well-control crewmen, injures 16 others, burns for 68 days, and triggers an ERCB inquiry.

The blowout’s telltale rotten-egg odour drifts as far as Winnipeg, 1500 kilometres east of the accident site.’)

Nichol 1991_p. 4 ^{(‘increasing # of well blowouts/uncontrolled flows associated w/ suspended/inactive wells over last few years’)} John R. Nichol “Orphan wells: Who is responsible, for how long, and at what cost?” Canadian Association of Drilling Engineers/Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors Spring Drilling Conference (Calgary: 10-12 April 1991) Paper #91-30: 6pp (finally available from AER library for fee)

(_p. 4: ’There has been an increasing number of well blowouts or uncontrolled flows associated with suspended/inactive wells over the last few years’)

Boychuk 2022b ^{(1992 US political coup in AB)} Regan Boychuk “American style democracy: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part two” York University Capital-as-Power blog (4 December 2022)↩︎

Taylor 2019_pp. 249-50 ^{(‘Texas Railroad Commission achieved predictability in oil prices Rockefeller would’ve appreciated’)} Graham D. Taylor Imperial Standard: Imperial Oil, Exxon, and the Canadian oil industry from 1880 Calgary: University of Calgary 2019

(_pp. 249-50: ’The Texas Railroad Commission, backed by the US federal government in the depths of the Great Depression, established some degree of price stability.

Because the oil output of the Texas fields was so large, accounting for almost half the world’s production, the system imposed by the state regulatory commission in effect achieved a degree of predictability in oil prices that Rockefeller would have appreciated.

After the Second World War, the measures of … “Seven Sisters” … and the Texas Railroad Commission resulted in an unprecedented period of price stability that lasted until the early 1970s, absorbing and coordinating the growth of large new producers in the Middle East, Venezuela, and Canada.’)

Sampson 1975_pp. 13-14 ^{(‘if anyone was expert in the subject of controlling supplies, it was not OPEC, but [the Round Table/Seven Sisters oil cartel]’)} Anthony Sampson The Seven Sisters: The greatest oil companies and the world they shaped New York: Viking 1975

(_pp. 13-14: ‘The oil companies, led by Exxon and Shell … through nationalizations in Mexico or Iran, revolution in Iraq, wars in the Middle East, they had successfully maintained the steady flow of oil, increasing never too fast to make the market collapse, never too slow to make consumers go short. If anyone was expert in the subject of controlling supplies, it was not OPEC, but they.’)

Boychuk 2023c_n. 25 ^{(16.7% cap, 1947-2018)} Regan Boychuk “On May 29^th, Alberta can slip its American noose: Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part four” York University Capital-as-Power blog (23 May 2023)

Blair 1976_pp. 98-99 ^{(‘between outright collusion & self-imposed restraint arising from an awareness of mutual self-interest, there is a third alternative—the techniques of “systems analysis”’)}_, 99-101 ^{(‘measure of the “closeness of fit” of the regression line to the actual observations (the “coefficient of determination”) is an astonishing 99.9 percent’)} John M. Blair The Control of Oil New York: Pantheon 1976

(_pp. 98-99: ’If the international oil industry had followed the customary sequence of industry growth and development, its earlier era of market control would by now have given way to the more sophisticated stage of oligopolistic interdependence. …

[… However,] Between outright collusion and self-imposed restraint arising from an awareness of mutual self-interest, there is a third alternative—the techniques of “systems analysis.”

Through the observance of complex formulae and mechanisms, production can be curtailed, variations in price eliminated, and competition substantially lessened without either the need for collusive meetings and agreements or dependence upon a state of psychological awareness of rivals’ probable reactions.

… The system of control over production developed by the companies has been designed to govern the individual rates of output of the various producing countries in such a way as to attain (and not exceed) a predetermined growth rate of overall supply.’)

(_pp. 99-101: ’For the eleven countries as a group, the average annual percentage increase in output during 1950-72 (the “growth rate”) works out at 9.55 percent. The measure of the “closeness of fit” of the regression line to the actual observations (the “coefficient of determination”) is an astonishing 99.9 percent. …

… What makes the stable growth of supply so extraordinary is the widely diverse movements of its separate components. …

That such has been the pattern of the international oil industry is apparent from Chart 5-2, which shows for 1950-73 the yearly change in total production for each of the nine leading producing countries.

The international supply picture is revealed as a composite of long-sustained steady increases … of much slower rates of increase … of precipitous rises … and of occasional pronounced declines …

Somehow the major oil companies have been able to “orchestrate” these and other aberrations into a smooth and uninterrupted upward trend in overall supply.’)

↩︎

Eayrs 1970_pp. 364 ^{(‘we did all we could to cater to US’ patronizing perceptions of Canada as a playground, not a nation-state’)}_, 365 ^{(‘in 1940, comrades-in-arms, facing a common peril, met in a common cause. Today we are hardly comrades; pollution is our only common peril’)}_, 366 ^{(“Very difficult indeed for Cdn gov to reject any major proposal which US gov presents w/ conviction as national security”)}_, 366 ^{(’as the imperial perimeter contracts, Canada is serving as a decompression chamber for a new generation of American imperialists during their transition to another level & venue of domination’)} James Eayrs “The road from Ogdensburg” Canadian Forum v50#? (February 1971): 364-66 [remarks delivered November 17^th 1970 at 12^th annual Canadian-American relations seminar at Columbia University, NYC]

(_p. 364: ’Americans regarded Canada as … A playground polity, not a nation-state.

So far from resenting such patronizing perceptions, we did all we could to cater to them. In 1948 the Minister of Finance devalued our dollar; tourists swarmed like locusts.’)

(_p. 365: ’1970 is the thirtieth anniversary of the Ogdensburg Agreement. … On 17 August 1940 comrades-in-arms, facing a common peril, met in a common cause.

Today we are hardly comrades (let alone in arms); pollution is our only common peril; no common enemy remains’)

(_p. 366: ’when American authorities adamantly demanded access to sites for warning radar in the Artic, it was plain further resistance was futile.

“Very difficult indeed,” was how our Minister of National Defense put it in a memorandum of October 1953, “for the Canadian government to reject any major proposal which the United States government presents with conviction as essential for the security of the United States.”

… after three decades of indentured labour as a continental chore-boy to the Strategic Air Command … We are no longer indispensable for the continent’s defence, merely convenient’)

(_p. 366: ’[In 1968] When … the Prime Minister [Trudeau I] launched his foreign policy review, the Ogdensburg option looked like a reasonable alternative … Today that is no longer true.

It is no longer true in North America. The main strategic threat to Canada comes not from our north but from our south.

The Pax Americana once reached around the world. Now it is being driven back to its continental base.

But “empire” is as American as cherry pie. As the imperial perimeter contracts … the hard driving entrepreneurs who have made this country what it is today are opening up a new empire in their own back yard.

Canada is serving as a decompression chamber for a new generation of American imperialists during their transition to another level and venue of domination.

It is not the sort of manifest destiny I desire for my country, any more than you would desire it for your own.’)

Powell 1971_pp. 1-2 ^{(‘American economic system is under a broad attack, quite new in American history but gaining momentum & converts’)}_, 2-4 ^{(‘Sources of the attack’)}_, 7 ^{(’setting “rich” against “poor” is cheapest of most dangerous kind of politics’)}_, 7-9 ^{(‘Apathy & Default of Business’’)}_, 10 ^{(‘Responsibility of Business Executives’’)}_, 11-12 ^{(‘Possible Role of the Chamber of Commerce’)}_, 26-27 ^{(‘Neglected Opportunity in the Courts’)}_, 28 ^{(‘question which merits most thorough exam: How can weight & influence of stockholders – 20 million voters – be mobilized?’)}_, 34 ^{(’business & enterprise system are in deep trouble, & hour is late’)} Future Supreme Court Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. “Attack on American free enterprise system” Confidential Memorandum to US Chamber of Commerce education committee chairman Eugene B. Syndor Jr. (23 August 1971): 34pp

(_pp. 1-2: “submitted at your request … The purpose is to identify the problem, and suggest possible avenues of action …

… No thoughtful person can question that the American economic system is under broad attack.

… The American political system of democracy under the rule of law is also under attack, often by the same individuals and organizations …

… what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America.

… the assault on the enterprise system is broadly based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.”)

(_pp. 2-4: “The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism, come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. …

Moreover, much of the media … either voluntarily accords unique publicity on these “attackers”, or at least allows them to exploit the media for their purposes.

This is especially true of television, which now plays such a predominant role in shaping the thinking, attitudes and emotions of our people.

One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in, its own destruction.

The campuses from which much of the criticism emanates are supported by (i) tax funds generated largely from American business, and (ii) contributions from capital funds controlled or generated by American business.

The Boards of Trustees of our universities overwhelmingly are composed of men and women who are leaders in the system.

Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon profits, and the enterprise system to survive.”)

(_p. 7: “The setting of the”rich” against the “poor”, of business against the people, is the cheapest of most dangerous kind of politics.”)

(_pp. 7-9: “What has been the response of business … ?

The painfully sad truth is that business … often have responded — if at all — by appeasement, ineptitude and ignoring the problem. …

In all fairness, it must be recognized that businessmen have not been trained or equipped to conduct guerilla warfare with those who propagandize against the system, seeking insidiously and constantly to sabotage it.

… business executives … have shown little stomach for hard-nose contest with their critics, and little skill in effective intellectual and philosophical debate.”)

(_p. 10: “The first essential — a prerequisite to any effective action — is for businessmen to confront this problem as a primary responsibility of corporate management.

The overriding first need is for businessmen to recognize that the ultimate issue may be survival — survival of what we call the free enterprise system …

The day is long past when the chief executive officer of a major corporation discharges his responsibility by maintaining a satisfactory growth of profits …

If our system is to survive, top management must be equally concerned with protecting and preserving the system itself.”)

(_pp. 11-12: “But independent and uncoordinated activity by individual corporations, as important as this is, will not be sufficient.

Strength lies in organization, in careful long-term planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in political power available only through united action and national organizations.

Moreover, there is the quite understandable reluctance on the part of any one corporation to get too far out in front and make itself too visible a target.

The role of the Chamber of Commerce is therefore vital. … It enjoys a strategic position, with a fine reputation and a broad base of support.

Also — and this is of immeasurable merit — there are hundreds of local Chambers of Commerce which can play a vital supportive role.”)

(_pp. 26-27: “American business and the enterprise system have been affected as much by the courts as by the executive and legislative branches of government.

Under our constitutional system, especially with activist-minded Supreme Court, the judiciary may be the most important instrument for social, economic and political change.

… This is a vast area of opportunity for the Chamber, if it is willing to undertake the role of spokesman for American business and if, in return, business is willing to provide the funds.

… The greatest care should be exercised in selecting the case in which to participate, or the suits to institute. But the opportunity merits the necessary effort.”)

(_p. 28: “The question which merits the most thorough examination is how can the weight and influence of stockholders — 20 million voters — be mobilized to support (i) an educational program and (ii) a political action program.”)

(_p. 34: “business and the enterprise system are in deep trouble, and the hour is late.”)

Bivens 2011 ^{(’economic growth since late`70s has been slow & inequitably distributed, largely because of poor policy choices. These choices only got worse in the 2000s, leading to an anemic economic expansion’)} Josh Bivens Failure by Design: The story behind America’s broken economy Ithaca: Cornell University 2011

RAND 2020_p. 40 ^{(’difference in 90th percentile’s share of economic output since`75 total $47 trillion’)} Carter C. Price and Kathryn A. Edwards “Trends in income from 1975 to 2018” RAND Corporation Working Paper #WR-A516-1 (September 2020): 62pp

(_p. 40: ’To produce these estimates, we first calculated the share of the economy going to the bottom 90th percent of the income distribution by year using data from the World Inequality Database and National Income Product Accounts data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

We then applied the share of the economy for those earning below the 90th percentile from 1975 to the size of the economy as measured by the Gross Domestic Income for each year and actual size of the economy going to that population.

The difference between these values amounts to $2.457 trillion in 2018.

In real terms, the cumulative [1975-2018] difference between these values … total $47 trillion’)

Bivens 2022 ^{(’quadrupling corp profits contributed disproportionately to 2022 inflation’)} Josh Bivens “Corporate profits have contributed disproportionately to inflation. How should policymakers respond?” Economic Policy Institute Working Economics blog (21 April 2022)

↩︎

Winks 1997_pp. 207-11 ^{(5pp partial list of Laurance’s conservation affiliations compiled by Rockefeller Center Room 5600 staff)}_, ix ^{(‘Laurance most consciously sought to follow in his father’s footsteps & did even more than his father to diversify the definition of conservation’)}_, 55 ^{(’founding investor in Intel, Apple, Komag, Apollo & others’)} Robin W. Winks Laurance S. Rockefeller: Catalyst for conservation Washington: Island Press 1997

(_p. ix: ’As I did my research I realized … that a single philanthropic family, over four generations, had contributed far more than any other philanthropists to the national parks movement. …

Thus, I set aside by larger project to examine the impact of the Rockefeller family on the rise of the national park ethic. …

… JDR, Jr.’s third son, Laurance, who most consciously sought to follow in his father’s footsteps, and who did even more than his father to diversify the definition of a national park, has not been the subject of sustained study.’)

(_p. 55: ’Laurance Rockefeller made money in many different ways … Using the stake provided by his father …

… In July 1969, Venrock Associates, an investment company, was formed.

This was a limited partnership funded by members of the Rockefeller family and (usually) nonprofit entities that had enjoyed long-standing relationships with the family, including the Museum of Modern Art, Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, and Rockefeller University.

Venrock enjoyed superior performance results and specialized in boosting startup or near-startup level companies.

By 1996 Venrock had funded 221 companies, and had been a founding investor in Intel Corporation (microprocessors), Apple Computers (personal computers), Komag, Inc. (computer memory discs), Apollo Computer (workstations), and others.’)

Baker 2023 ^{(‘Clinton-era telecom law granted social media Co’s immunity from libel laws that newspapers + TV stations have to follow. Now we’re living w/ the consequences: billionaires controlling what does & doesn’t count as a lie’)} Dean Baker “Congress gave tech companies immunity from libel laws: That needs to change” Jacobin (25 September 2023)

(’Section 230 … of the [1996](https://ca.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/4-506-7494?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true#:~:text=A federal law regulating the,other online service providers (Pub.) Communications Decency Act … protects internet hosts from liability for third-party content.

This means that Facebook and Twitter/X cannot be sued for carrying defamatory material posted by their users. This contrasts with the treatment of print or broadcast media.

If the New York Times prints a libelous letter or runs a libelous ad, it is not just the person who produced the material who can be sued — the paper is potentially liable. Similarly, if CNN carries a defamatory ad or features people who make outlandish and defamatory statements, it can be sued for defamation.

In fact, much of Dominion Voting System’s successful defamation case against Fox News was based on statements from guests on its shows, not from the company’s paid reporters.’)

↩︎

Eayrs 1957 James Eayrs “The Round Table movement in Canada, 1909-1920” Canadian Historical Review v38#1 (March 1957): 1-20

Eayrs 1970_p. 366 ^{(“not the sort of manifest destiny I desire for my country, any more than you would desire it for your own”)} James Eayrs “The road from Ogdensburg” Canadian Forum v50#? (February 1971): 364-66 [remarks delivered November 17^th 1970 at 12^th annual Canadian-American relations seminar at Columbia University, NYC]

Mint 19/11/18 ^{(‘in colonial era, most of India’s sizeable foreign exchange earnings went straight to London—severely hampering the country’s ability to import machinery & technology to embark on modernisation’)} Ajai Sreevatsan “British Raj siphoned out $45 trillion from India: Utsa Patnaik” Mint (19 November 2018)

Davis 2001 ^{(‘examining a series of El Niño-induced droughts & the famines that they spawned around the globe in the last third of the 19th century, Mike Davis discloses the intimate, baleful relationship between imperial arrogance and natural incident that combined to produce some of the worst tragedies in human history’)} Mike Davis Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World London: Verso 2001

Patnaik & Patnaik 2021_{pp. 113-20, 126-27} ^{(’conventional accounting is incapable of grasping that the purpose of colonialism; there’s a fundamental difference between a country’s experience after being colonized & all preceding experience’)} Utsa Patnaik and Prabhat Patnaik Capital and Imperialism: Theory, history, and the present New York: Monthly Review 2021

(_{pp. 113-20, 126-27:} ’Of all the different regimes that capitalism has built to overcome the problems it would face if it were indeed a closed and self-contained system, the ideal one from its point of view has been colonialism. …

… colonial possessions fulfilled several functions … they provided primary commodities for metropolitan capitalism; they provided these primary commodities gratis, as the counterpart of the economic surplus appropriated by the metropolitan economy …

The two main instruments used by the imperial powers in their colonies were capturing the colonial markets and appropriating a part of the surplus without any quid pro quo.

Capturing colonial markets often required breaking down the natural economy …

Likewise, the appropriation of surplus took different forms, depending upon what had existed earlier. …

These two instruments were independent of each other but additive of their effects.

They were independent in the sense that the extraction of surplus by the colonial rulers predated the quest for markets by the metropolis, which really began in the early nineteenth century and proceeded on its own trajectory. …

… The reason why the drain of surplus is not easily comprehended is that the balance of payments must always balance.

… How then can we talk of “unrequited exports” from the colony? … Conventional accounting obfuscates the drain for two distinct reasons.

First, it is incapable of capturing the concept of an economic surplus. …

Second, conventional accounting is incapable of grasping that the purpose of colonialism is to extract this surplus; hence, to offset the surplus against the services rendered in the process of extracting it constitutes a supreme irony.

It is like refusing to recognize the existence of an extortion racket on the grounds that the extortion money that is paid constitutes only the payment for the services of those who have come to collect the extortion money.

There is … a fundamental difference between a country’s experience after being colonized and all preceding experience.

Not only is the surplus not spent on domestic goods as was the case earlier, thus giving rise to economic regression in the colonial economy, in the sense of a shrinking of the level of macroeconomic activity, but the colonial regime’s raison d’être lies in extracting the maximum amount of surplus.

It does not simply take away some pre-set magnitude of surplus but adjusts its demands to whatever is available for it to take. …

The “drain of surplus,” in other words, did not just mean a replacement of the old set of surplus extractors by a new set, namely the old imperial regime by the new regime of metropolitan capitalism.

… The colony did not witness a continuation of surplus appropriation as it had earlier. Rather, it became an appendage to another economy, which was never the case earlier.

It is not surprising that modern mass poverty … arose for the first time in the third world economies only after they were colonized.

… There is a common misconception that the third world has always been afflicted by poverty, because of its low labor productivity that has continued to this day because it has not benefitted from the Industrial Revolution as the advanced capitalist world has done.

… This conception is flawed in at least three important senses.

… first … countries that did not develop capitalism could nonetheless have done so in emulation of the West, and ushered in an industrial revolution of their own as did Japan, the only major Asian country that escaped the tentacles of colonialism.

What stood in the way of the backward economies developing their own “capitalism from above” through state initiatives, as in Japan, was colonialism itself …

Second, the impact of colonialism was actually to reduce the per capita incomes in the colonized countries and dependencies.

… Hence the picture of all countries starting from a more or less similar situation and some forging ahead while others stayed where they were is wrong: those who forged ahead have the others a kick backwards.

Third, there is a fundamental difference between poverty that existed earlier and modern poverty that is associated with capitalism.

Modern poverty is not just material deprivation; it involves … the loss of rights, even customary rights … and they creation of a reserve army of labor so that employment becomes uncertain on a daily basis—all these give a particular poignancy to poverty that did not exist earlier.

This modern mass poverty is the legacy of the impact of metropolitan capitalism upon the third world.’)

Boychuk 2022c_n13 ^{(‘scheme unveiled as a fait accompli on 1959 anniversary of Leduc #1: a nuclear blast in Fort McMurray to double the world’s oil reserves in an instant’; thwarted by Conservative PM Diefenbaker, who was later couped)} Regan Boychuk “Who would do this to themselves? Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part three” York University Capital-as-Power blog (13 December 2022)

(”The Manning’s Rockefeller dictatorship in Alberta culminated in the scheme unveiled as a fait accompli on the 1959 anniversary of Leduc #1 (and the British retreat from Palestine): a nuclear blast in Fort McMurray to double the world’s oil reserves in an instant.

The insane scheme was approved at every level of the provincial, federal, and US governments. There were no hearings or environmental studies, the oversight committee was toothless by design.

The Rockefellers were only denied the status of the world’s first trillionaires by Canadian Prime Minister Diefenbaker, who used the anti-nuclear movement as the excuse for protecting Alberta and everyone else.

Under President Kennedy, the Rockefellers coup’d Diefenbaker in 1963 to pave the way for the Vietnam-assisting-war-criminal, Canadian prime minister Lester Pearson.”)

Eayrs 1970_pp. 364-65 ^{(“these early 1950s speeches of Lester Pearson make painful reading today because of all that’s happened since”)} James Eayrs “The road from Ogdensburg” Canadian Forum v50#? (February 1971): 364-66 [remarks delivered November 17^th 1970 at 12^th annual Canadian-American relations seminar at Columbia University, NYC]

Price 2011_pp. 11-13 ^{(‘Pearson was an up & comer in Canadian Dept. External Affairs, responsible for British Empire affairs + the League of Nations before being sent to Great Britain as first secretary, where he attended the London Naval Conference of 1935; prior to conference, Pearson, under the pseudonym “T,” provided a detailed analysis of Canada’s position in an important article in Foreign Affairs’)} John Price Orienting Canada: Race, empire, and the Transpacific Vancouver: University of British Columbia 2011

Fox, Gonsoulin & Price 2014_pp. 3-4 ^{(‘1st institution to adopt asset based lending to oil industry by securing hydrocarbon reserves seems to be lost in history; banks could mortgage underlying fields b/c of unusual circumstance debtor could own hydrocarbons outright’)} Jason Fox, Dewey Gonsoulin and Kevin Price “Reserve based finance: A tale of two markets: Part 1” Oil & Gas Financial Journal (January 2014): 6pp

(_pp. 3-4: ’the US upstream finance market started much earlier than its international counterpart.

… The first institution to adopt asset based lending to the oil industry by securing hydrocarbon reserves seems to be lost in history …

Critical to the development of reserve based lending in the US was the ability of banks to have asset-level perfected security through a mortgage on the underlying field because of the unusual circumstance that it is generally possible for the debtor to own the hydrocarbons outright.

Moreover, because even small operators usually produced from several wellheads and reservoirs, the ability to place multiple properties into an asset class, the reserve base, allowed for diversification …

The US market expanded significantly in the 1970s as oil prices increased. … lenders would loan to an entity that had a specific set of producing assets that generated cash flow that would be paid directly to the lender.

In the early 1980s, however, lenders became more competitive and the modern day borrowing base structure emerged.

Borrowers were now allowed to receive their production proceeds directly and revolving lines of credit became the norm.’)

↩︎

Vague 2023_pp. 9 ^{(‘goal of Debt Economics is to discover new & better ways of employing & controlling debt & its consequences’)}_, 58-59 ^{(‘no coincidence unrestrained, ill-advised real estate lending preceded banking crises of 1929 + late 1980s + 2008’)}_{, 65-66, 77, 79-80} ^{(’I believe growth in debt has significantly contributed to higher asset values, & in fact, that’s been the case; debt remains primary mechanism for accessing future income’)}_, 187-88 ^{(‘false narratives of financial crises betray many millions who do not contribute to a crisis but are badly hurt by it nonetheless’)} Secretary of Banking and Securities for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Richard Vague The Paradox of Debt: A new path to prosperity without crisis Croydon: Forum 2023

(_p. 9: ‘Debt is a paradox. It creates and destroys. Even short of those extremes, it distorts … The goal of debt economics is to discover new and better ways of employing and controlling debt and its consequences.’)

(_pp. 58-59: ’In the lead-up to the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, the US accumulated a gargantuan mountain of new mortgage debt, totalling $5 trillion.

This debt was so large it was practically impossible to miss — except that most economists did miss it entirely, and therefore failed to predict the financial crisis.

… real estate-related lending was by far the largest component of private sector debt, comprising half of all private debt. With lending of that volume, an adverse trend in the credit quality of real estate loans can disrupt the entire US economy.

… By comparison, a major energy lending crisis in 2016 was barely noticed across the broader economy, because energy lending made up only a $1.3 trillion slice of the debt pie — less than 5 percent. …

… It’s no coincidence that unrestrained, ill-advised real estate lending preceded the banking crises of 1929, the late 1980s, and 2008.’)

(_{pp. 65-66, 77, 79-80}: ’in part … the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 … was caused by unrestrained mortgage lending to unqualified or poorly qualified borrowers, that is, households that were taking on much more debt for a house purchase than they could afford, or could be expected to repay, over the longer term.

As a result of the 2008 crisis, household real estate assets plummeted [from 195 percent] to 127 percent of GDP. They have since regained ground to reach 182 percent of GDP as of 2021.

Yet the biggest story of the Great Debt Explosion is stocks. …

Combined, the net value of stocks and real estate assets has nearly doubled, rising from 238 percent to 456 percent of GDP. I believe the growth in debt has significantly contributed to these higher asset values. …

… If my theory about the influence of debt levels on wealth levels is correct, then it would follow that most of the increased value of publicly traded stocks over time should come from the rise in prices of existing stocks rather than the addition of new stocks from new companies.

And in fact, that has been the case. Initial public offerings (IPOs) have made only a minor contribution to the rise in stock values. …

… Note that stocks, like debt — at least from this one perspective — bring money from the future into the present, but in a more speculative way. …

… Stocks and real estate are both in large measure dependent upon debt. This reinforces debt’s role as the primary mechanism for accessing future income.’)

(_pp. 187-88: ’In the largest sense, false narratives of financial crises betray the many millions who do not contribute to a crisis but are badly hurt by it nonetheless.

Financial crises can be foreseen, and prevented, once we start paying attention to the factor at the heart of them: excessive lending and debt. …

… Rather than ask why lending booms happen, we should invert the question and ask why lending booms do not happen more frequently. Given that there is almost always the drive to grow loans aggressively, and that the initial phase of a lending boom brings good news, why are there periods when loan growth does not run too hot?

One answer is that lending booms do not occur when regulators or risk managers have the upper hand.’)

↩︎

Fredrickson et al. 2018_p. S95 ^{(‘early Reagan administration (1981–1983) launched an overt attack on EPA, combining deregulation w/ budget & staff cuts’)} Leif Fredrickson, Christopher Sellers, Lindsey Dillon, Jennifer Liss Ohayon, Nicholas Shapiro, Marianne Sullivan, Stephen Bocking, Phil Brown, Vanessa de la Rosa, Jill Harrison, Sara Johns, Katherine Kulik, Rebecca Lave, Michelle Murphy, Liza Piper, Lauren Richter and Sara Wylie “History of US Presidential assaults on modern environmental health protection” Public Health Then and Now v108#S2 (April 2018): S95-S103

Lewandowsky 2021_pp. 65 ^{(‘organized climate denial: Climate science versus partisans’)}_, 66-67 ^{(‘from tobacco to climate change to COVID-19’)}_, 68 ^{(‘how to respond? The communicators’ toolbox’)} Stephan Lewandowsky “Liberty and the pursuit of science denial” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences v42 (December 2021): 65-69

(_p. 65: ’Although Republican and Democrat voters showed similar concern about climate change in the 1990s, by 2016, only 40% of Republicans worried about climate change, compared to 84% of Democrats [6].

This political polarization has been evident in countless surveys in the U.S. and around the world, including in Australia [7], the United Kingdom [8], and in 56 nations around the world [9].

The reasons for the polarization can be traced back to elite cues. …

The media also give undue prominence to press releases from large corporations arguing against climate mitigation while ignoring messages from organizations with scientific expertise [12].’)

(_pp. 66-67: ‘The COVID-19 pandemic that turned the world upside down in early 2020 also triggered an ’infodemic’ of misinformation [43,44] and conspiracy theories, for example the claim that 5G broadband installations were responsible for the virus-borne disease, which led to the destruction of telecommunications installations in the UK [45,46].

Other misinformation targeted behavioral public-health measures such as lockdowns [45] or mask wearing [47].

Although much of the misinformation surrounding COVID-19 is difficult to attribute directly to political actors, in some cases there are striking similarities between climate-denial operatives and COVID-related disinformers.

… One such connection involves the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER), a libertarian free-market think-tank that has a history of bogus argumentation about climate change (e.g. by denying the scientific consensus), and which has recently engaged in similarly bogus argumentation about COVID-19 [50]. …

As with climate change, COVID-19 disinformation has been shown to be amplified by right-leaning media in a quantitative analysis [54].

It is unsurprising therefore that, in replication of the public-opinion dynamics of climate change, the American public has become increasingly polarized along partisan lines on COVID-19 [55], with tragic outcomes. …

The reduced compliance with pandemic control measures eventually translated into higher COVID-19 infection and fatality growth rates in pro-Trump counties [56].

Surveys of the public yield similar conclusions [57].

The COVID-19 pandemic thus condensed into a single year the ideological mechanics and consequences that have been unfolding across many decades in climate denial.

The vastly accelerated time scale and the availability of unambiguously measurable consequences — illnesss and death — can serve as an illustration and warning of the consequences that may arise from climate denial in the future.’)

(_p. 68: ’The effectiveness of that toolbox is, however, limited by the political context in which it can be applied.

Sociologist Robert Brulle once noted, ’the barriers to action on climate change are based in the distribution of social power in the economic, political, and cultural spheres.

Introducing new messages or information into an otherwise unchanged socioeconomic system will accomplish little’ [69, p. 185].

This recognition is crucial because it clarifies that overcoming climate denial and facilitating climate mitigation is not simply a matter of improving communication but of political change.

Effecting this political change, in turn, requires a better understanding of the ideology that is currently at the heart of most organized science denial, from tobacco to climate to COVID-19, namely libertarianism.

The role of libertarian attitudes in the rejection of science has been established across many domains [70].’)

Egan & Mullin 2021_{p. 218 (fig. 2)} ^{(Gallop: ‘Polarization in American public opinion on climate change, 1989–2016’)} Patrick J. Egan and Megan Mullin “Climate change: US public opinion” Annual Review of Political Science v20 (May 2017): 209-227

(_{p. 218 (fig. 2)}: ’

Pew 2023_p. 5 ^{(‘since Covid, 24% more Republicans don’t believe scientists act in public interest’)} Brian Kennedy and Alec Tyson “Americans’ trust in scientists, positive views of science continue to decline: Among both Democrats and Republicans, trust in scientists is lower than before the pandemic” Pew Research Center (14 November 2023): 40pp

(_p. 5: ’nearly four-in-ten Republicans (38%) now say they have not too much or no confidence at all in scientists to act in the public’s best interests.

This share is up dramatically from the 14% of Republicans who held this view in April 2020.

Much of this shift occurred during the first two years of the pandemic and has persisted in more recent surveys.’)

Posner & Stigler 1980_pp. 1-2 ^{(‘President Reagan has unique opportunity to prune luxuriant & pernicious federal overexpansion of antitrust law enforcement’)}_, 3-4 ^(‘President can throttle back antitrust enforcement w/o new legislation/higher appropriations, & probably w/o antagonizing politically influential constituencies’)^ University of Chicago Law School senior lecturer/federal appellate judge/20^th century’s most-cited legal scholar Richard A. Posner and key leader of Chicago school of economics/’Nobel’ laureate George J. Stigler “Throttling back on antitrust: A practical proposal for deregulation” (December 1980) Series I, Box 2: Subject File: Martin Anderson Files (Ronald Reagan Library): 4pp

(_pp. 1-2: ’President Reagan has … a unique opportunity to prune an area of luxuriant and pernicious federal regulation: the overexpansion of antitrust law enforcement.

The healthy core of federal antitrust policy is the prohibition of horizontal price fixing (collusion) and large horizontal mergers … is supported by a consensus of economists …

Around this core has grown up in recent years a periphery of bizarre and burdensome extensions of antitrust policy, to the point where federal antitrust law has become a regulatory code that inhibits competition both among US businesses and with foreign competitors.

Perversely, the most efficient firms have been targets of protracted and enveloping antitrust challenges …

The time is ripe to prune the excesses of antitrust enforcement:

1.    There is a growing academic consensus, stretching from Milton Friedman on the Right to Lester Thurow on the Left, that many hallowed principles of antitrust are silly …

…

5.    The growth of the private antitrust suit …  with their potentially unlimited treble damage judgments, are a source of considerable resentment (and expensive distraction) among businessmen.’)

(_pp. 3-4: ’President Reagan can throttle back on antitrust enforcement without asking for new legislation or higher appropriations, and probably without antagonizing politically influential constituencies.

1.    He has only to appoint as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice a lawyer committed to enforcing the antitrust laws in accordance with the economic consensus position, i.e., confining enforcement to price fixing and large horizontal mergers. …

3.    Partially to offset the dyspeptic tone of above, the Assistant Attorney General could and should affirm his commitment to act as a vigorous spokesman of the competitive interest throughout the federal government, and especially before other government agencies — the ICC, FCC, FERC, International Trade Commission, etc.

4.    When a vacancy next occurs on the FTC, the President should appoint as Commissioner (and designate as Chairman) a like—minded person who would move the FTC the same direction that is suggested above for the Antitrust Division. …

5.    These appointments not directly affect the private antitrust suits brought by private plaintiffs. But the indirect effects will be enormous, and wholly beneficial.

Although we do not have figures, our impression is that a large fraction of private suits are piggyback on prior government suits, so curtailing the latter lead in time (pretty quickly) to a dramatic fall—off in private suits.

Further, many courts would probably defer to the announced positions of the Justice Department, viewed as a responsible enforcer of the antitrust laws, on questions of antitrust policy arising in private suits.’)

Sveriges Riksbank 1982 ^{(“for his seminal studies of industrial structures, functioning of markets & causes & effects of public regulation”)} “George J. Stigler” 1982 Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences {so-called ‘Nobel Prize’ in economics}

(”His studies of the forces that give rise to regulatory legislation opened up a completely new area of economic research in the intersection of economics and law.”)

Hantke-Domas 2003_pp. 165-66 ^{(‘George Stigler initiated a new theory & Richard Posner was the first academic to attribute regulation to a theory based on the concept of public interest; from this evidence, one can conclude the Public Interest Theory does not have any known origin; consequently, it does not exist as such’)} Michael Hantke-Domas “The public interest theory of regulation: Non-existence or misinterpretation?” European Journal of Law and Economics v15#2 (March 2003): 165-94

(_pp. 165-66: ’Microeconomic literature teaches of the existence of two contending theories of regulation. … the Chicago theory … George Stigler {“The theory of economic regulation”} … initiated a new theory … (known as well as the Economic Theory of Regulation). … Richard Posner {“Theories of economic regulation”}, fellow of the Chicago School, was the first academic to attribute the traditional rationale for regulation at the time to a theory based on the concept of public interest.

… Ensuing authors … none of them has ascribed the formation of the theory to anyone else.

All these authors have seen the theory as a normative analysis presented as positive theory.

This characterisation of the so-called Public Interest Theory has been the standard account given by microeconomic textbooks.

This paper delves into law, politics, and academic writing to discover the originators, if any, of that theory. …

This paper focuses on the Progressive Era and the New Deal years of American history, especially prolific historical periods in regulatory initiatives.

Despite both the law and politics supporting regulation in the public interest, none of their claims creates a specific theory of regulation.

After reviewing law, politics, and academic writing, one can conclude that no author has claimed intellectual ascendancy over the so-called Public Interest Theory, nor have they mentioned any author or supporter of it.

From this evidence, one can conclude that the Public Interest Theory does not have any known origin; consequently, it does not exist as such.

The evidence collected from academic writings shows that scholars identify the Public Interest Theory with the welfare economics conception of market failures (monopoly, public goods, asymmetry of information, and externalities).

Despite there being some similarity, the characterisation is not identical because the concept of public interest is apparently absent from the concept of market failure.

The Public Interest Theory has two acceptable concepts.

The first, embraced by Stigler (1971) and Posner (1974), explains that regulation seeks the protection and benefit of the public at large.

The second, developed by ensuing academics, defines it as a system of ideas, which proposes that when market fails economic regulation should be imposed in order to maximise social welfare.’)

Black 20013_pp. 6-8 ^{(‘moral hazard is in nature of corporation; 4 factors critical for opportunists seeking best field for fraud: ease of obtaining control + weak regulation + ample accounting abuses + ability to grow rapidly; regulators fear being blamed for industry failing on their watch, experience their own version of moral hazard. The temptation (shared with the industry) is to engage in a cover-up’)}_, 299-300 ^{(‘book explains how to conduct effective regulation & supervision & how to prosecute successfully the most elite financial criminals; long past time to end war on effective financial regulation & regulators that produces a self-fulfilling prophecy of regulatory failure’)} William K. Black The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One: How corporate executives and politicians looted the S&L industry updated edn. (2005; Austin: University of Texas 2013)

(_pp. 6-8: ’Moral hazard is the temptation to seek gain by engaging in abusive, destructive behavior, either fraud or excessive risk taking.

Failing firms expose their owners to moral hazard. This is not unique to S&Ls; it is in the nature of corporations.

… If the corporation makes an extremely risky investment and it fails, the loss is borne entirely by the creditors. If the investment is a spectacular success, the gain goes overwhelmingly to the shareholders.

The shareholders have a perverse incentive to take unduly large risks rather than to make the most productive investments.

… Moral hazard theory also explains why failing firms have an incentive to engage in reactive control fraud.

… Opportunistic control fraud can also occur in waves. Opportunists seek out the best field for fraud. Four factors are critical: ease of obtaining control, weak regulation, ample accounting abuses, and the ability to grow rapidly.

These characteristics are interrelated. An industry with weak rules against fraud is likely to invite abusive accounting.

Industries with abusive accounting have superior opportunities for growth because they produce the kinds of (fictitious) profits and net worth that cause investors and creditors to provide ever-greater funds to the control fraud.

The interrelationship between the opportunities for reactive and opportunistic control fraud made the regulatory and business environments ideal for control fraud. …

… (Appendix B_[pp. 308-9] is a copy of a candid letter from Norman Strunk, the former head of the S&L trade association, to his successor, Bill O’Connell.

It explains how the industry used its power over the administration and Congress to limit the Bank Board’s supervisory powers.)

Regulators, fearful of being blamed for the industry failing on their watch, experience their own version of moral hazard. The temptation (shared with the industry) is to engage in a cover-up.

The industry will lobby regulators, the administration, and Congress to aid the cover-up by endorsing accounting abuses and minimizing takeovers of insolvents.

… The fact that characteristic business and regulatory environments cause waves of control fraud is critical for public policy.

It means that we can predict the fields that are most at risk and choose policies that will reduce, instead of encourage, waves of control fraud.

Similarly, we can identify likely control frauds by knowing their characteristics practices. We can attack them because we can aim at growth, their Achilles’ heel.”)

(_pp. 299-300: ’My book explains how to conduct effective regulation and supervision and how to prosecute successfully the most elite financial criminals.

It is a book about regulatory courage in the face of brutal, powerful opposition that goes far beyond making regulation “really hard.” It is an inspiring tale.

A regulatory race to the bottom will generate regulatory leaders who are bottom feeders that lack the competence, integrity, and courage to take on control frauds and their political allies.

We need a competition in integrity. … Teams of apolitical regulators of great competence and integrity can be recruited by worthy leaders in this nation within weeks.

We ran a real world test of whether regulators or markets were most effective against control frauds. Regulators were vastly superior.

… It is long past time to end the war on effective financial regulation and regulators that produces a self-fulfilling prophecy of regulatory failure.

We cannot afford to continue to produce the toxic mix of the three D’s and modern executive compensation, a mix that creates a fraud-friendly environment and produces epidemics of control fraud that drive our continuing, intensifying financial crises.’)

Stein 1992_{front flap + pp. 192-93} ^{(‘this insight, that a multinational investment bank might be operating as an irresponsible polluter of the financial environment, collecting its fees & letting third persons pick up the tab for the pollution, was a fascinating way of looking at the firm’)} Benjamin J. Stein License to Steal: The untold story of Michael Milken and the conspiracy to bilk the nation New York: Simon & Schuster 1992

(_{front flap + pp. 192-93}: ’Drexel Burnham Lambert, an operation built upon an extraordinarily clever series of deceptions and manipulations … turned corporate America upside down and gave [the US] a push toward the longest recession in post-World War II history. …

… young securities lawyer named Daniel J. Mogin … “Maybe the point isn’t whether the deals work out in the long run, but just whether or not Drexel can continue grinding out the bonds and get their big fees, and forget tomorrow.”

This insight, that Drexel might be operating as an irresponsible polluter of the financial environment, collecting its fees and letting third persons pick up the tab for the pollution, was a fascinating way of looking at the firm.

As an analogy, Drexel could be compared to a sawmill that dumped chemicals used in wood treatment into the river.

By doing so, the mill saved money on pollution control equipment and made unusual profits.

The profits were larger that the likely fines for pollution, and so pollution became a way of doing business.

This was Drexel, dumping its junk into the rivers of finance, or so it seemed.’)

King 1988_p. 242 ^{(‘indiscriminate dumping of hazardous waste was common until very recently’)} Susan M. King “Lenders’ liability for cleanup costs” Environmental Law v18#2 (Winter 1988): 241-91

(_p. 242: ‘Until very recently, the indiscriminate dumping of hazardous waste by individuals and businesses indulging in cheap and sloppy management practices was common throughout the country.’)

Tillman, Pontell & Black 2020_p. 113n2 ^{(Spirit of `08 reflects S&L Debacle: ‘Take what you want today + get rich + don’t worry about what happens in the future’)} Robert H. Tillman, Henry N. Pontell and William K. Black Financial Crime and Crises in the Era of False Profits Oxford: Oxford University 2020

(_p. 113n2: ’In the aftermath of the financial crisis that began in 2008, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission began sifting through the wreckage of failed institutions and spectacularly bad deals looking for causes.

… How, they asked, could the employees at these [non-prime mortgage] firms assemble these products and offer them for sale /knowing/ they were likely vastly overpriced?

The answer… was a common cultural attitude that had an acronym IBGYBG, which stood for “I’ll be gone, you’ll be gone.”

… In other words: “Take what you want today, get rich, and don’t worry about what happens in the future.”

… Economist Robert Kuttner describes IBGYBG as meaning: “Let’s do this deal before the rubes figure out the game, then quickly cash in and get out before it collapses.”’)

↩︎

WP 28/4/82 ^{(1982 vaccine documentary stirs controversy)} Donna Hilts “TV report on vaccine stirs bitter controversy” Washington Post (28 April 1982)

National Archives_pp. 4-5 ^{(‘social media posts & Tweets’ve replaced 19th century pamphlets & etchings, but many anti-vaccination sentiments remain similar’)} “Victorian health reform: How did the Victorians view compulsory vaccination?” British National Archives lesson pack (no date): 17pp

(_pp. 4-5: ’Resistance to vaccines has been around as long as vaccinations have existed. …

Edward Jenner sparked the push for widespread vaccination beginning in the 1790s. …

1840 marked the first in a series of laws regarding vaccination in Britain.

After the scientific community built a better understanding of how infectious disease spread, the British government outlawed the practice of variolation with the first Vaccination Act of 1840.

The Act of 1840 also provided free vaccinations for the poor through the new Poor Law Unions.

The government ramped up its focus on improving vaccination rates and subsequently passed the Vaccination Act of 1853. The Act made it compulsory for all infants under three months old to be vaccinated.

Local registrars of births, marriages and deaths gave out vaccination certificates to parents of newborns which had to be returned signed by a doctor. Negligent parents could be fined or imprisoned.

In 1867, the government increased its efforts and made it compulsory for all children under the age of 14 to be vaccinated against smallpox. However, this was not the case for many children.

For some Victorians these laws marked an infringement of civil liberties for the sake of improving public health.

Also, the principle of laissez-faire was central to economic life. Perhaps, this example of state intervention was arguably designed to prevent greater evils that might threaten a free-trade economy—probably not to provide positive benefits for its citizens.

Who would work in the factories or mines if large numbers of the population died from smallpox? Others did not like the idea of compulsory vaccination because of its association with the Poor Law or objected to it on religious grounds.

A formal pressure group, the Anti-Vaccination League, formed in London after the Act of 1853. Later the Anti-Compulsory Vaccination League was founded in 1867 in response to the new law in 1867 and argued through its well organized public campaigns that this was an infringement of personal choice.

In the 1870s and 1880s, a host of anti-vaccination pamphlets, books and journals were printed to spread the protest movement’s message including their paper, the “Vaccination Inquirer”.

Later the new National Anti-Vaccination League emerged determined to expand support for its ideas on a more national basis in 1896.

Certainly the outcry from anti-vaccination protesters had an impact on British vaccine policy.

In 1885, a massive anti-vaccination protest in Leicester attracted a crowd of nearly 100,000 people. In response, a Royal Commission was formed to understand attitudes on all sides regarding vaccination.

The commission heard from opponents and supporters of vaccination for seven years to advise the British government on how to move forward. Their report in 1896 stated that vaccination was effective in protecting against smallpox. It also recommended that the government abolish the penalties for not vaccinating.

In 1898, a new Vaccination Act removed these penalties and introduced a new clause known as the “conscientious objector” clause that allowed parents who did not believe vaccines were safe or effective to obtain a certificate exempting their children from vaccination.

Whilst vaccination is one of the greatest accomplishments in improving public health, there are parallels between the Victorian anti-vaccination movement and today.

Of course, the means of communication have changed since Victorian times, social media posts and Tweets have replaced the pamphlets and etchings of the 19th century⁠—but many of the anti-vaccination sentiments are similar.’)

Szreter 2003_pp. 421-23 ^{(‘century-long process of political adjustment btwn liberal democracy & propertied interests resulted in complex political mechanisms for converting economic growth into enhanced population health. However, the rise of a “neoliberal” agenda …’)}_, 424 ^{(‘new generation of civic leaders devised new sources of funding from resource rent of local utility monopolies; Britain & US eventually followed suit’)}_, 428-29 ^{(‘continuous & accumulating social inequality & environmental degradation produced by unregulated free market growth poses insidious threats to our collective security & health’)} Simon Szreter “The population health approach in historical perspective” American Journal of Public Health v93#3 (March 2003): 421-31

(_pp. 421-22: ’In Britain and France, the Industrial Revolution disrupted population health and stimulated pioneering epidemiological studies, informing the early preventive public health movement.

A century-long process of political adjustment between the forces of liberal democracy and propertied interests ensued.

The 20^th-century welfare states resulted as complex political mechanisms for converting economic growth into enhanced population health.

However, the rise of a “neoliberal” agenda, denigrating the role of government, has once again brought to the fore the importance of prevention …

… The modern origins of this debate lie in the late 18^th century, when the focus of discussion was over the significance of the so-called “diseases of civilization,” such as gout, respiratory diseases and tuberculosis, “hysteria,” and neuroses.

The privileged classes were becoming aware that they increasingly enjoyed a degree of freedom from some of the epidemics that continued to ravage the impoverished masses …

Yet this seemed to bring the rich an increased tendency to chronic and mental diseases of “luxury.”

Furthermore, the poor remained as mired in their misery as ever.

… There can be little doubt that part of the reason for the resurgence of interest in this approach during the last 2 decades has been the epidemic-scale health problems once again unleashed by unrestrained global economic and urban growth.

… Edwin Chadwick, the éminence grise of the British central state in this period, aimed at an administrative and engineering solution to the problem of high urban death rates.

… But in trying to force Britain’s towns to tax themselves for this purpose, Chadwick ran into a political firestorm of localist, libertarian opposition, which ended his career.

… delay and prevarication was the order of the day.

This was not helped by the capacity of key commercial interests, notably private water companies, to use the law to dispute any efforts to force them to supply adequate clean water, in an era before the germ theory and microscopic water

analysis had established their scientific authority.

There would seem to be something of a parallel here with the propensity today of wealthy tobacco companies and those dealing in other harmful products to dispute the evidence of the negative health effects of their products.

… Because so many of the innovative practices and products, sanctioned by the criteria of profitability and shareholder value, can never be fully assessed in advance for the totality of their health implications, the public health movement inevitably finds itself in conflict with often-powerful commercial interests.

An historical perspective shows that this is owing to the intrinsically ambivalent effects that economic growth has on population health.

… the human record in fact shows no necessary, direct relationship between economic advance and population health, rather a more ambivalent and contingent relationship.

But when we come to the “modern” industrial revolution, and the development of scientific medicine, isn’t everything different? Well, no.’)

(_{pp. 424, 426}: ’Significant health improvements only began to appear when the increasing political voice and self-organization of the growing urban masses finally made itself heard, increasingly gaining actual voting power from the late 1860s onwards (a process not completed until 1928).

… Recognizing the need for an extensive program of investment in municipal health amenities and social services, this new generation of civic leaders devised new sources of funding from the massive revenues of local utility monopolies.

… Eventually, also motivated by military fears, the early 20th-century British state under the “New Liberals” began to enact Bismarckian-style, centrally funded measures aimed at improving the health and physique of its urban industrial work-force.

Even the US federal government finally followed suit in the New Deal and post–World War II era.’)

(_pp. 428-29: ’The tragedy of all this is that, during the last 2 decades of structural adjustment and conditionality, there has never been any strong historical evidence for believing in either the demographic transition theory or the McKeown thesis view that maximizing economic growth can itself produce health benefits.

A discriminating evaluation of the historical evidence indicates, quite to the contrary …

… At the beginning of the third millennium, massive disruption due to rapid and relatively unregulated economic growth is once again upon us.

… One of the most unfortunate consequences of the Washington consensus policies of structural adjustment imposed on less advanced economies has been a weakening of essential state capacity to collect reliable vital statistics …

… insidious threats to our collective security and health are posed by the continuous and accumulating social inequality and environmental degradation produced by unregulated free market growth; these may, in the long run, be even more devastating to global population health …

… An epidemiological approach that prefers to focus only on individuals’ bodies, lifestyles, and personal risks is less likely to detect and correctly diagnose the causes of the early effects of these gradual changes in the world’s living conditions.

There is, therefore, much research that needs to be done today from a population health perspective.’)

BU SPH 2022 ^{(‘growing acceptance for vaccines took a turn w/ release of `82 documentary, despite no supporting data’)} Associate professor of global health Christopher Gill and GH801 students Madolyn Dauphinais, Michael Olaseni Bamgbose, Kelsey Flannery, Deena Afana, Josh Harvey, Andy Hui, Taylor Paiva, Elena Stratis and Maria Tjilos “COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: How Did We Get Here and What Do We Do Now?” Boston University School of Public Health (GH801: How to License a New Vaccine) fall 2021 class project (1 March 2022)

(’Between the 1950s-70s, vaccine acceptance became more favorable in the eyes of the public. This growing acceptance for vaccines took a turn with the release of the 1982 documentary DPT: Vaccine Roulette, a film where doctors and parents claimed that children developed permanent brain damage as a result of receiving the DPT vaccine despite no data supporting that claim.)

↩︎

Akerlof & Romer 1993 ^{(effort to bring Control Fraud to the attention of mainstream economists)} George A. Akerlof and Paul R. Romer “Looting: The economic underworld of bankruptcy for profit” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity v24#2 (1993): 1-73

(_p. 2: ‘Firms have an incentive to go broke for profit at society’s expense (to loot) instead of to go for broke (to gamble on success). Bankruptcy for profit will occur if poor accounting, lax regulation, or low penalties for abuse give owners an incentive to pay themselves more than their firms are worth and then default on their debt obligations.’)

(_p. 5: ‘Our description of a looting strategy amounts to a sophisticated version of having a limited liability corporation borrow money, pay it into the private account of the owner, and then default on its debt.’)

(_pp. 13-15: ‘If regulations make use of accounting values that differ from true economic or market values, this creates opportunities for abusive behavior that can be consistent with the letter of the law.’)

(_pp. 59, 65: ’When regulators hid the extent of the true problem with artificial accounting devices, when congressmen pressured regulators to go easy on favored constituents and political donors, when the largest brokerage firms lobbied … when the lobbyists for the savings and loan industry adopted the strategy of postponing action until industry difficulties were so large that general tax revenue would have to be used to address problems instead of revenue raised from taxes on successful firms in the industry—when these and many other actions were taken, people responded rationally to the incentives they faced within the political process.”

As Harvard’s Greg Mankiw commented: “Indeed, given the incentives that regulators set up, it would be irrational for operators … not to loot.’)

(_p. 60: ‘If we learn from experience, history need not repeat itself.’)

Galbraith 2014_{pp. 167, 160} ^{(’Bush family no stranger to the financial sector; financial frauds helped propel entire US economy, sustaining spending + economic growth past `04 election’)} University of Texas (Austin) Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs chair in government/business relations James K. Galbraith The End of Normal: The great crisis and the future of growth New York: Simon & Schuster 2014

(_p. 167: ’The Bush family was no stranger to the financial sector.

In 1981 Vice President George H.W. Bush led a commission that helped set the stage for deregulation of the savings and loan industry, and it was Neil Bush, brother of George W., who had served as a director of Silverado Savings and Loan—a notoriously fraud-ridden firm.

… in the fall of 2001 the Bush [Jr.] Department of Justice reassigned five hundred FBI agents from financial fraud to counterterrorism … however … they were never replaced. …

There was a pattern of promotions inside the regulatory apparatus that placed some of the least effective regulators of the savings and loan era back in charge of large sectors of the financial industry, especially on the West Coast.

Complacent leadership occupied other top offices, including at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and at the Federal Reserve.

… the reward was sustained spending and economic growth right through and past the election of 2004 and on into President Bush’s second term.’)

Houston Post 10/6/90 ^{(‘possible link between organized crime & CIA in failure of 25 S&L’s’)} Pete Brewton “DC bank swept up in intrigue funds channeled to North account” Houston Post (10 June 1990): A1ff

Brewton 1992 ^{(‘Corruption, greed & abuse of power in the nation’s highest office; The book that Simon & Schuster signed up but wouldn’t publish!’)} Pete Brewton The Mafia, CIA & George Bush: The untold story of America’s greatest financial debacle New York: SPI 1992↩︎

Reed 2004_pp. 1-2 ^{(introduction written by Bush Sr.)}_, 266-67 ^{(‘dossier arrived at CIA in Aug`81’)}_, 268-69 ^{(‘Canadian pipeline software was programmed to go haywire’)} Former Secretary of the Air Force Thomas C. Reed At the Abyss: An insider’s history of the Cold War 2004; New York: Ballantine 2005

(_pp. 266-67: ’at an economic summit meeting in Ottawa … when the new American president met with President François Mitterand of France … Mitterand told Reagan of his intelligence service’s success in recruiting a KGB agent … Colonel Vladimir I. Vetrov, was designated “Farewell” by the French DST.

… Reagan expressed great interest … The dossier … arrived at the CIA in August 1981.’)

(_pp. 268-69: ‘In order to disrupt the Soviet gas supply, its hard currency earnings from the West, and the internal Russian economy, the pipeline software that was to run the pumps, turbines, and valves was programmed to go haywire, after a decent interval, to reset pump speeds and valve settings to produce pressures far beyond those acceptable to pipeline joints and welds’)

Weiss 1996_{pp. 121, 124} ^{(’Farewell Dossier’s 4,000 KGB docs passed thru VP Bush’)} Gus W. Weiss “The Farewell Dossier: Duping the Soviets” CIA Center for the Study of Intelligence Studies in Intelligence (1996): 121-26

Radio Free Europe 11/5/6 ^{(‘the recurring fear of EU’s dependency on Russian gas’)} Roman Kupchinsky “Analysis: The recurring fear of Russian gas dependency” Radio Free Europe (11 May 2006)

(’[in Jan`82] as the Soviet Union was beginning construction of a $22 billion, 4,650-kilometer gas pipeline from Urengoi in northwest Siberia to Uzhhorod in Ukraine with the intention of supplying Western Europe, the CIA issued a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) titled “The Soviet Gas Pipeline In Perspective.”

… according to the NIE, the Soviets “have used the pipeline issue to create and exploit divisions between Western Europe and the United States. In the past, the Soviets have used West European interest in expanding East-West commerce to undercut US sanctions, and they believe successful pipeline deals will reduce European willingness to support future US economic actions against the USSR.”

… The Urengoi gas field, located in northwest Siberia’s Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug, was one of the largest Soviet gas fields. The main customers for Urengoi gas were West Germany, France, and Italy.

The initial volume of the pipeline was to be 40 billion cubic meters per year, which would mean that Soviet gas could account for 30 percent of German and French gas imports, and 40 percent of Italy’s. Such figures were approaching a dependency level too great for the White House to accept.

Washington apparently dealt with these concerns in a direct manner initially. In January 1982, US President Ronald Reagan purportedly approved a CIA plan to sabotage a second, unidentified gas pipeline in Siberia by turning the Soviet Union’s desire for Western technology against it.’)

WP 27/2/4 ^{(‘most monumental non-nuclear explosion & fire ever seen from space’)} David E. Hoffman “Reagan approved plan to sabotage Soviets” Washington Post (27 February 2004)

Chesnokov 2020 ^{(‘if “explosion was comparable to a nuclear one”, destruction should’ve been comparable to the Tunguska meteorite. Where is all this?’)} Edvard Chesnokov “Did Reagan plan to blow up the Soviet gas pipeline using a computer virus? American media spread the sensation of a secret CIA operation against the USSR in the early eighties” Komsomolskaya Pravda (28 January 2020) trans. in East and West (7 February 2020)

French 2020 ^{(‘no 1 knew date of explosion; NORAD had no record; no newspaper accounts’; NYT + Reuters ran story anyway)} Alex French “The secret history of a cold war mastermind: Gus Weiss, a shrewd intelligence insider, pulled off an audacious tech hack against the Soviets in the last century. Or did he?” Wired (11 March 2020)

(’I couldn’t find anybody who knew the actual date of the pipeline explosion.

NORAD said it didn’t have any records of a massive blast in Siberia in the two years surrounding best estimates.

There are no newspaper accounts of the explosion or reports of interruptions to natural gas service in western Europe.

(’Tim Weiner, New York Times correspondent, wrote about the operation in his national book award winning CIA history A Legacy of Ashes and then again, years later, for Reuters.

… Weiner pulled down a copy of Legacy of Ashes from his bookshelf and scanned the relevant pages. He told me he’d had no reason to doubt the account provided by Reed.

“I had three high-level people saying, ‘Yes, that happened.’ … No one saying, ‘No, that never happened.’ It seemed solid enough”’)

↩︎

ERCB 2013_{pp. 166, 60-61} ^{(1982 Lodgepole disaster)} Gordon Jaremko Steward: 75 years of Alberta energy regulation Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board 2013

(_p. 166: ’A sour-gas blowout at Lodgepole, southwest of Edmonton, kills two well-control crewmen, injures 16 others, burns for 68 days, and triggers an ERCB inquiry.

The blowout’s telltale rotten-egg odour drifts as far as Winnipeg, 1500 kilometres east of the accident site.’)

AER 2018 ^{(reminder on eve of Wadsworth revelations)} Kara MacInnes “Lodgepole: The blowout that changed the safety landscape: How one tragic disaster ushered in a new era of sour gas regulations” Alberta Energy Regulator (1 October 2018) [AER VP Robert Wadsworth’s revelations about scale of AB’s unfunded cleanup came one month later]

Boychuk 2022c_n. 12 ^{(excerpts on 1948’s Atlantic #3)} Regan Boychuk “Who would do this to themselves? Alberta’s Rockefeller coups: Part three” York University Capital-as-Power blog (13 December 2022)

CBC 31/10/7 “Mulroney tried to cover up cash payments he received in hotel rooms: Schreiber” CBC News (31 October 2007)

CP 22/10/84 ^{(Notley crash)} Canadian Press “Prisoner hailed as hero in Notley crash” Globe and Mail (22 October 1984): A5

CP 27/2/85 ^{(Notley inquiry)} Canadian Press “Notley’s pilot was suffering from too little sleep: report” Globe and Mail (27 February 1985): A4

LASA 2004/5 ^{(Reminder after Iraq: ‘McGillivray II’s death—following in father’s footsteps—came as a great shock to AB legal community’)} Brenda McCafferty “From the vault: Following in father’s footsteps” Legal Archives Society of Alberta Architypes v13#2 (Winter 2004/2005): 3

CH 17/12/84 ^{(McGillivray II ‘died in sleep despite good health’)} Blair Shewchuk “Alberta’s chief justice dead at 66” Calgary Herald (17 December 1984): A1

CP 18/12/84 ^{(‘died of natural causes’)} Canadian Press “Obituary: William McGillivray Alberta’s Chief Justice” Globe and Mail (18 December 1984): M7 [244 words]↩︎

CH 17/12/84 ^{(McGillivray II ‘died in his sleep despite good health’)} Blair Shewchuk “Alberta’s chief justice dead at 66” Calgary Herald (17 December 1984): A1

(’Alberta’s chief justice for the past 10 years, died in his sleep early Sunday at age 66.

Friends and family say the death came as a shock because Chief Justice McGillivray was thought to have been in good health. …

By law he was entitled to retain the post until his 75^th birthday.

… His father, A.A. McGillivray, had been a member of the same court for a number of years. … His eldest son, Douglas, is a local lawyer. …

… McGillivray’s replacement will be named “in due course” by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney’)

CH 27/12/84 ^{(‘opposition leaders believed Lougheed was staying’)} Don Truckey “(News Analysis) Alberta politicians gaze into their crystal balls” Calgary Herald (27 December 1984): A1ff

(’the key question may be when Lougheed decides to retire.

… opposition leader Ray … Martin and … Alberta Liberal leader Nick … Taylor both believe he’s staying.’)

Duncan 1984 ^{(’Herald took opportunity to cast cloud of controversy calculated to spawn disrespect’)} Alberta Crown Attorneys’ Association President Bruce W. Duncan Letter-to-the-editor Calgary Herald (28 December 1984): A6

(”I read with dismay your front-page story on Dec. 17 dealing with the death of Chief Justice William McGillivray.

… the Herald took the opportunity of his untimely death to cast a cloud of controversy calculated to spawn disrespect for the memory of a man who is entitled to the highest respect from all Albertans and Canadians.”)

CP 3/5/38 ^{(only ‘Pulitzers’ ever given to foreign papers, coming after their aid in Round Table’s 1935 coup in AB & before Round Table’s 1940 coup in Ottawa/Ogdensburg)} Canadian Press “Alberta papers lauded in fight for free press: Edmonton Journal awarded Pulitzer plaque: ‘Dictatorship’” Calgary Herald (3 May 1938): 8

CP 31/12/84 ^{(‘Lougheed says he is not considering retirement’)} Canadian Press “Lougheed plans to remain at helm” Globe and Mail (31 December 1984): N4

(’Premier Peter Lougheed says he is not considering retirement as he enters his 20th year as leader of the Alberta Conservatives.

… The probability that he will welcome in 1986 as Tory leader is “relatively high,” Mr. Lougheed said.’)

G&M 1985^{(‘persistent rumors Lougheed will retire’)} Editorial “Effervescent Alberta” Globe and Mail (25 January 1985): 6

(”Rumors persist that Mr. Lougheed will retire by June, offering the Tories a chance for renewal …

Ontario might wish for such effervescent politics.”)

Pratt 1985 ^{(‘only 1 question on delegates minds: Will Lougheed retire as rumored?… perhaps he feels his work is done’)} Columnist Sheila Pratt “Tory faithful left guessing about premier’s plans” Calgary Herald (1 April 1985): A8

(”this weekend was the closest the party has come to a leadership convention since Lougheed took over in 1965.

There was only one question on delegates minds — is Lougheed going to retire as rumored …

A key point was Lougheed’s prediction of a 1986 election. …

But Lougheed didn’t give a commitment to lead the party through the next election. …

… reliable reports say there’s to be no … optional … fall session of the legislature this year. …

… When asked if he’s left the door open to retire Lougheed admitted the door has “been opening and closing and shifting a bit…”

But there were other subtle clues at the convention that could be interpreted as preparing the part for transition.

… An uneasy reminder perhaps Lougheed feels he’s done his work.

… A private celebration is rumoured to be planned for Aug. 30, to mark the 1971 election victory.”)

CBC 13/9/12 ^{(‘His grandfather, Sir James Lougheed, was a cabinet minister in R.B. Bennett’s Conservative government & a key figure in AB’s 1905 entry into Confederation’)} “Former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed dies in hospital: Peter Lougheed: the father of modern-day Alberta” CBC News (13 September 2012)

(’What is less remembered is that he honed his tough negotiating style on American oil executives prior to taking on Liberal Ottawa.

One of the first big legislative initiatives of the Lougheed government was to raise provincial royalties on its then-growing energy sector.  

The big oil companies were outraged and threatened to withdraw from the province.

But the Lougheed government stood its ground and then used its newfound wealth to build hospitals and a professional civil service.  

For good measure, it also bought Pacific Western Airlines, alienating some of its free enterprise supporters but ensuring a strong Western transportation hub based out of Calgary.  

… His grandfather, Sir James Lougheed, was a cabinet minister in R.B. Bennett’s Conservative government and was a key figure in the province’s entry into Confederation in 1905.

… the Lougheed Tories increased their popular vote and their majority … In the three subsequent elections — 1975, 1979 and 1982 …

… Ottawa sought to make Canada energy independent and put greater control of petroleum resources in federal hands.  

The West, however, saw the NEP as a tax grab, a way for Ottawa to enrich itself on Alberta’s bounty and Lougheed memorably went on television in 1980 to announce that Alberta would reduce its production to 85 per cent.  

This bold salvo — turning down the taps, as it was seen — eventually led to the negotiation of a federal-provincial pricing and revenue-sharing agreement in 1981, in the midst of the constitutional negotiations.  

By then, Lougheed had become a key player in the talks surrounding the patriation of the Constitution from Britain and the establishment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

… Lougheed retired from politics in 1985, but still kept a fairly public profile for a while. In 1986, he was made a companion of the Order of Canada.

In 1987, he was tapped by then-prime minister Brian Mulroney to help negotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and from 1991 to 1996 he co-chaired the Canada-Japan Forum.  

After leaving public office, Lougheed went to work for a number of corporate boards, including the Royal Bank of Canada and the Carlyle Group.

… Although a huge proponent of Alberta’s oil and gas resources, Lougheed expressed concern in the 2000s with the hasty development of the oilsands, which he felt was coming at the expense of proper infrastructure and the settling of environmental issues.  

He also registered his concern at the increasing pressure the US was exerting on Alberta to guarantee its oil supply and in 2011 came out against the proposed Keystone XL pipeline to the US, on the grounds that Alberta should be refining the heavy oil from the oilsands itself and then exporting the finished product.

In a 2004 speech, Lougheed insisted that Alberta’s most important resource was water, not oil and gas, and suggested that Canada should resist all demands to export its water south of the border.’)

Appel 2023 ^{(‘UofA’s chancellor from 1982-86 was himself a 14th Waffen veteran’)} Jeremy Appel “The coincidences behind Canada’s Nazi-honoring debacle are deeply unsettling” Jacobin (30 September 2023)

CBC 20/5/22 ^{(‘to gasps of surprise from supporters at an invitation-only event in Calgary, Kenney said the 51.4% support he received was not enough to stay on’)} Wallis Snowdon “Alberta Premier Jason Kenney is resigning as United Conservative Party leader. Now what? Kenney announced his resignation but is not prevented from running in leadership race” CBC Explains (20 May 2022)↩︎

SourceWatch_{New Citizenship Project} ^{(NCP initiated Project for the next American century w/ Bradley + Olin + Scaife foundation $)} “New Citizenship Project” SourceWatch (Mar`03/Jul`07)

(’Founded in 1994 … The New Citizenship Project … initiated the Project for the New American Century, one of the key behind-the-scenes architects of the Bush administration’s foreign policy. …

… Funding sources appear to be exclusively from three far right-wing neo-conservative think tank funders:

The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee, Wisconsin: This is the primary sponsor of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), which was the recipient of over a million dollars in 2001 alone.

“By way of a program known as the New Citizenship Project, Inc., PNAC Project for the New American Century received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.”

John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. of New York: This foundation grew out of a family manufacturing business (chemical and munitions) and funds right-wing think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute for Public Policy Change, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace.

Scaife Foundations – Sarah Mellon Scaife Foundation and Scaife Family Foundation – in New York: These foundations are financed by the Mellon industrial, oil, and banking fortune.

The John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. listed grants in 1997 show the subtitle for The New Citizenship Project as the “Project for the Next American Century.”

It clearly appears that the original 1994 [Project for the Next American Century] concept has become the current Project for the New American Century.’)

Vaa 2005_pp. 29 ^{(‘PNAC established in`97 to promote “American global leadership”’)}_, 34 ^{(‘American New Right & Neo-Conservatives active users of think tanks to create policies’)}_, 37-38 ^{(‘PNAC marked shift in Neo-Conservatism to quite different view on foreign policy’)}_, 39 ^{(PNAC’s SoP’s: ’We aim to make the case & rally support to advance American interests in the new century’)} Ida Sofia Vaa “Project For The New American Century: How one think tank may influence American foreign policy” University of Oslo Department of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages Master’s Thesis (Spring 2005): 78pp

(_p. 29: ’The Neo-Conservative think tank PNAC was established in 1997 with a very clear goal to promote “American global leadership.”

PNAC is an initiative by the New Citizenship Project (NCP), a non-profit organization which is mostly funded by rightwing organizations and foundations.’)

(_p. 34: ’The American conservatives, from the New Right to the Neo-Conservatives, have in general been active users of think tanks in order to create policies.

A think tank is normally a group which is financed by one or more organizations or foundations and which main objective is to create policies on specific issues.

The most prominent NeoConservative think tanks are the AEI, formed in 1943, The Heritage Foundation, which was founded in 1973, and one of the most recent additions, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) …

AEI was established to meet the challenges from a growing liberal establishment and connected with Neo-Conservatives like Irving Kristol in the 1950s and 1960s’)

(_pp. 37-38: ’The establishment of PNAC marked a shift in Neo-Conservatism. A new generation of Neo-Conservatives had taken over several of the leading positions that the older generation had held before them.

Robert Kagan, William Kristol, Joshua Muravchik, Richard Perle, and Paul Wolfowitz had by the second half of the 1990s taken over the positions of Nathan Glazer, Irving Kristol, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Norman Podhoretz.

They did not only represent a change in persons, but also had quite different view on foreign policy.

The first generation of Neo-Conservatives had become weary of an aggressive foreign policy because they simply felt that there was no longer a need for strict containment or pre-emptive wars to have a stable world order.’)

(_p. 39: ’The PNAC’s Statement of Principles says:

“American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives … have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.”

It is difficult to define the strategy that PNAC wants to use to achieve these goals. The people behind PNAC primarily state what their goals are, but not how to influence those with the power to work for these goals.’)

Boychuk 2010b_pp. 29-30 ^{(‘bitumen producers wrote their own royalty rules, which were implemented “in the main” by Klein in 1997’)} Regan Boychuk “Misplaced generosity: Extraordinary profits in Alberta’s oil and gas industry” University of Alberta Parkland Institute (November 2010): 52pp

(_pp. 29-30: ’During the 2007 royalty review’s public consultations, industry reassured Albertans that the tar sands royalty regime was “thoughtfully developed with all stakeholders” through “collaboration among industry, government and other” and “adopted after extensive consultation.”

In reality, the tar sands royalty regime in place between 1997 and 2008 was “the result of a concerted effort on the part of representatives with expertise in business economic decision-making from six companies active in the Oil Sands.”

The six companies whose executives drafted the regime were Syncrude, Gulf (now part of ConocoPhillips), Suncor, Amoco (now part of BP), Imperial Oil (controlled by ExxonMobil) and Canadian Natural Resources.

Tar sands producers wrote their own royalty rules and they were implemented, “in the main,” by Klein’s government in 1997.

Those rules, along with [the development of Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage] SAGD, sparked what the world’s leading business newspaper called “North America’s biggest resources boom since the Klondike gold rush more than a century ago.”’)

Steward 2017_pp. 16-33 ^{(“Ralph Klein & the National Task Force on Oil Sands Strategies”)} Gillian Steward “Betting on bitumen: Alberta’s energy policies from Lougheed to Klein” Parkland Institute, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Corporate Mapping Project (June 2017): 48pp

Urquhart 2018_{pp. 52-57, 74-87} ^{(Klein & NTFOSS)} Ian Urquhart Costly Fix: Power, politics, and nature in the tar sands North York: University of Toronto 2018

Weiss 1996 Gus W. Weiss “The Farewell Dossier: Duping the Soviets” CIA Center for the Study of Intelligence Studies in Intelligence (1996): 121-26

WP 7/12/3 ^{(Weiss obit)} “Gus W. Weiss, 72” Washington Post (7 December 2003)↩︎

BU SPH 2022 ^{(‘growing acceptance for vaccines took a turn w/ release of `82 documentary; new, stronger wave of hesitancy introduced by Andrew Wakefield’s illegitimate 1998 claims linking MMR vaccine to autism’)} Associate professor of global health Christopher Gill and GH801 students Madolyn Dauphinais, Michael Olaseni Bamgbose, Kelsey Flannery, Deena Afana, Josh Harvey, Andy Hui, Taylor Paiva, Elena Stratis and Maria Tjilos “COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: How Did We Get Here and What Do We Do Now?” Boston University School of Public Health (GH801: How to License a New Vaccine) fall 2021 class project (1 March 2022)

(’Unfounded fears and controversy continued to surround vaccines, albeit in mostly small groups, until a new, stronger wave of hesitancy was introduced following the publication of Andrew Wakefield’s illegitimate claims linking the MMR vaccine to autism in 1998.

Its publication was accompanied by a significant drop in MMR vaccine coverage and can be considered the beginning of the modern anti-vaccination movement most of us are familiar with.

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the vaccines developed to tackle it have become a polarizing topic. A variety of factors have fueled an increase in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, including concerns about their effectiveness, potential side effects (immediate and long-term), and their rapid production and distribution.

The use of social media greatly contributes to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, allowing for the increased propagation of misinformation and disinformation and conspiracy theories, leading to great mistrust in the scientific and medical communities.

Additionally, confusion about how different COVID-19 vaccines work and the lack of consistent public health messaging have led many to feel hesitant about becoming vaccinated against COVID-19.

This is not to mention other prominent factors that impact attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines, such as socioeconomic status, barriers to care, and structural racism, which continue to broadly perpetuate healthcare inequities.’)

Wakefield et al. 1998 ^{(infamous retracted Autism study)} Royal Free Hospital and School of Medicine (Departments of Medicine and Histopathology) Inflammatory Bowel Disease Study Group: Surgeon Andrew J. Wakefield, S.H. Murch, A. Anthony, J. Linnell, D.M. Casson, M. Malik, M. Berelowitz, A.P. Dhillon, M.A. Thomson, P. Harvey, A. Valentine, S.E. Davies and J.A. Walker-Smith “RETRACTED: Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children” Lancet v351#9103 (28 February 1998): 637-41

(_p. 641: ‘This study was supported by the Special Trustees of Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust and the Children’s Medical Charity.’)

Goldacre 2009_p. 249 ^{(‘concerns about where the 12 children in the study came from; of the 12, 11 sued drug Co’s; Wakefield eventually received £435,643 plus expenses’)} Ben Goldacre Bad Science London: Harper Perennial 2009

(_p. 249: ’more worrying are the concerns about where the twelve children in the 1998 Royal Free study came from.

While in the paper it is stated that they were sequential referrals to a clinic, in fact Wakefield was already being paid £50,000 of legal aid money by a firm of solicitors to investigate children whose parents were preparing a case against MMR, and the GMC is further investigating where the patients in the study came from, because it seems that many of Wakefield’s referrals had come to him specifically as someone who could show a link between MMR and autism, whether formally or informally, and was working on a legal case.

This is the beacon problem once more, and under these circumstances, the fact that only eight of the twelve children’s parents or physicians believed the problems were caused by MMR would be unimpressive, if anything.

Of the twelve children in the paper, eleven sued drug companies (the one that didn’t was American), and ten of them already had legal aid to sue over MMR before the 1998 paper was published.

Wakefield himself eventually received £435,643 plus expenses from the legal aid fund for his role in the case against MMR.’)

LAT 2/12/98 ^{(’marriage of Exxon & Mobil recreates world’s biggest corporation’)} Nancy Rivera Brooks “Exxon and Mobil agree to biggest merger ever” Los Angeles Times (2 December 1998)

(’The marriage of Exxon and Mobil, the No. 1 and No. 2 US oil companies, would create a host of superlatives—biggest merger, biggest publicly traded oil company and world’s biggest corporation.

Motorists probably would notice little change because both brands will continue to exist, although the new company may have to sell some of its 48,500 gasoline stations as well as a refinery or two in response to the antitrust review that is sure to follow.’)

Jimenez et al. 2022_p. 1 ^{(‘prominent public health official Charles Chapin in 1910 helped initiate a successful paradigm shift, deeming airborne transmission most unlikely’)} Jose L. Jimenez, Linsey C. Marr, Katherine Randall, Edward Thomas Ewing, Zeynep Tufekci, Trish Greenhalgh, Raymond Tellier, Julian W. Tang, Yuguo Li, Lidia Morawska, Mesiano-Crookston, David Fisman, Orla Hegarty, Stephanie J. Dancer, Philomena M. Bluyssen, Giorgio Buonanno, Marcel G.L.C. Loomans, William P. Bahnfleth, Maosheng Yao, Chandra Sekhar, Pawel Wargocki, Arsen K. Melikov and Kimberly A. Prather “What were the historical reasons for the resistance to recognizing airborne transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic?” Indoor Air v32#8 (August 2022): 18pp

(_p. 1: ’For most of human history, the dominant paradigm was that many diseases were carried by the air, often over long distances and in a phantasmagorical way.

This miasmatic paradigm was challenged in the mid to late 19th century with the rise of germ theory in the mid to late 19th century with the rise of germ theory, and as diseases such as cholera, puerperal fever, and malaria were found to actually transmit in other ways.

Motivated by his views on the importance contact/droplet infection, and the resistance he encountered from the remaining influence of miasma theory, prominent public health official Charles Chapin in 1910 helped initiate a successful paradigm shift, deeming airborne transmission most unlikely.

This new paradigm became dominant.

However, the lack of understanding of aerosols led to systematic errors in the interpretation of research evidence on transmission pathways.

For the next five decades, airborne transmission was considered of negligible or minor importance for all major respiratory diseases, until a demonstration of airborne transmission of tuberculosis (which had been mistakenly thought to be transmitted by droplets) in 1962.

The contact/droplet paradigm remained dominant, and only a few diseases were widely accepted as airborne before COVID-19: those that were clearly transmitted to people not in the same room.’)

RIMJ 2015 ^{(’state’s greatest physician proved many doubting doctors that contagious diseases were not spread airborne’)} RIMJ managing editor Mary Korr “Charles V. Chapin, MD: ‘Dean of City Health Officers’” Rhode Island Medical Journal v98#9 (September 2015): 74

(’The Rhode Island Medical Society described Dr. Charles V. Chapin (1856–1941) as “the greatest physician who has yet lived in Rhode Island” …

… In 1910, Dr. Chapin published The Sources and Modes of Infection, which became a public health classic and secured his preeminence in the nascent field of epidemiology.

Largely through his efforts the Providence City Hospital opened in 1910, for the treatment of patients with communicable diseases.

According to Dr. Goldowsky, Dr. Chapin instituted the aseptic nursing techniques there which “he had seen applied at the immaculate Pasteur Hospital in Paris.”

Dr. Chapin ultimately proved to many doubting physicians that contagious diseases were not spread airborne, but as the result of contact.’)

JAMA 1911 ^{(‘Chapin deals w/ limitations of isolation & holds contact to be principle way infectious diseases spread’)} “Book notices … THE SOURCES AND MODES OF INFECTION” Journal of the American Medical Association v57#2 (8 July 1911): 146

(’Chapter 3 deals with the limitations to the value of isolation and whether one agrees with all the statements or not …

… Contact is held to be the principal way by which many infectious diseases are spread’)

Goldowsky 1979_pp. 316 ^{(‘described TB as infectious & perhaps also contagious in some cases’)}_, 317 ^{(‘medical career earned him a national reputation, but never made him rich’)}_, 319-21 ^{(’among more privileged, isolation was feasible, but another matter for poor families in crowded tenements; his contagious disease hospital operated on premise that transmission of infections between patients was effected by contact, rather than thru air’)} Seebert J. Goldowsky “Charles V. Chapin: His influence on concepts of public health: A quiet man in a small city established public health standards which earned world-wide recognition” Rhode Island Medical Journal v62#8 (August 1979): 313-23

(_p. 316: ’In May of 1881 he presented his first paper before the Providence Medical Association on “The Pathology of Phthisis” (i.e. tuberculosis).

In this paper … he clearly stated in the paper that tuberculosis was an infectious process and “perhaps in some cases also a contagious disease.”’)

(_p. 317: ’challenging medical career, which, although it never made him rich, earned for him a national reputation and proved to be more satisfying than private practice.

… He was the first public health officer in America to bring this background to bear in developing his philosophy of public health administration.’)

(_pp. 319-21: ’a brief digression is in order to highlight the brilliant and breathtaking achievements in bacteriology during the brief period from 1876 to 1894.

Koch’s landmark discovery of the bacillus of anthrax in 1876 was followed by his demonstration of bacteria as the cause of wound infection, and then in rapid succession, by the discovery of the causative organisms of gonorrhea (1879); typhoid (1880); tuberculosis by Koch (1882); cholera, again by Koch (1883); erysipelas (1883); diphtheria (1887); tetanus (1884); pneumonia (1884); meningitis (1886); gas gangrene (1892); and plague (1894).

The chain of discoveries, of course, continued beyond that date. These were indeed heady times to be an active participant in the public health movement.

… Chapin had advocated the use of “humanized” virus in vaccination against smallpox until the newer safe glycerinized bovine virus introduced after 1901 under federal standards was available.

… by 1900 he was convinced that terminal disinfection was ineffective in preventing the spread of disease. He spoke widely on what he called the “fetish of disinfection” until his concepts came to be widely accepted.

… Among the more privileged, isolation in the home was feasible, but for poor families in crowded tenements isolation was another matter.

… In 1901 he completed a massive volume titled Municipal Sanitation in the United States containing an incredible 970 pages.

Described as a comprehensive study of public sanitary methods, it helped to solidify his growing national reputation as a public health authority.

… After long delays construction of the Providence City Hospital on Eaton Street was commenced in 1908. The hospital opened its doors in 1910.

It was the first contagious disease hospital in the United States to apply the aseptic nursing techniques on a full scale. Chapin had first seen it applied at the immaculate Pasteur Hospital in Paris.

It was based on the concept that transmission of infections between patients was effected by contact, rather than through the air. The airborne component was eliminated by adequate spacing of the beds or use of cubicles.

… He was awarded the Marcellus Hartley Honor Medal of the National Academy of Sciences and was the first recipient of the Sedgwick Memorial Medal of the American Public Health Association for “distinguished service in public health.”

In London he was awarded Honorary Fellowship of the Society of Medical Officers of Health, an honor which had come to few Americans.’)

Greenhalgh et al. 2021 ^{(“10 scientific reasons in support of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2”)} Trisha Greenhalgh, Jose L. Jimenez, Kimberly A. Prather, Zeynep Tufekci, David Fisman and Robert Schooley “Ten scientific reasons in support of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2” Lancet v397#10285 (1 May 2021): 1603-5

Lewis 2022_p. 26 ^{(23Dec`21: ’WHO first utters “airborne”’)} Dyani Lewis “Why the WHO took two years to say COVID is airborne: Early in the pandemic, the World Health Organization stated that SARS-CoV-2 was not transmitted through the air. That mistake and the prolonged process of correcting it sowed confusion and raises questions about what will happen in the next pandemic” Nature v604#7904 (7 April 2022): 26-31

(_p. 26: ’As 2021 drew to a close, the highly contagious Omicron variant of the pandemic virus was racing around the globe, forcing governments to take drastic actions once again.

… Amid the wave of desperate news around the year-end holidays, one group of researchers hailed a development that had seemed as though it might never arrive.

On 23 December, the World Health Organization (WHO) uttered the one word it had previously seemed incapable of applying to the virus SARS-CoV-2: ‘airborne’.’)

FTC 1999 ^{(Claimed Exxon/Mobil merger would preserve competition & protect consumers)} Federal Trade Commission “Exxon/Mobil agree to largest FTC divestiture ever in order to settle FTC antitrust charges: Settlement requires extensive restructuring and prevents merger of significant competing US assets: 2,431 gas stations in northeast, mid-Atlantic, California and Texas to be sold: California refinery sale will prevent higher prices: FTC says agreement will preserve competitive gas prices” FTC file #9910077 (30 November 1999)

(’The Federal Trade Commission announced today that it has accepted a proposed settlement of charges that Exxon Corporation’s acquisition of Mobil Corporation would violate federal antitrust laws. …

“Because Exxon and Mobil are such large and powerful competitors, and because they now compete in several product and geographic markets in the United States, the Commission insisted on extensive restructuring before accepting a proposed settlement,” said FTC Chairman Robert Pitofsky.

“This settlement should preserve competition and protect consumers from inappropriate and anticompetitive price increases.”’)

Extra! 2002 ^{(’10 months work costing nearly $1M, key result = Gore won; coverage framed to support & justify political status quo’)} Miranda C. Spencer “Who won the election? Who cares? Florida recount consortium muffles results of months of efforts” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting Extra! v2002#1 (January 2002)

(’The study, dubbed a “double check on democracy” by the St. Petersburg Times (11/11/01), was spearheaded by a consortium of six major news organizations—the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Tribune Co. (parent of the L.A. Times), Associated Press and CNN—plus two Florida papers, the Palm Beach Post and St. Petersburg Times.

In an effort costing nearly $1 million in pooled funds and some 10 months’ work, the group rounded up uncounted ballots from all 67 Florida counties, then commissioned the University of Chicago’s nonpartisan National Opinion Research Center to examine them.

After numerous unforeseen delays and a unanimous decision to postpone publication “indefinitely” so reporters could be mobilized to cover the terrorist aftermath, the completed data were released to the consortium by NORC near the first anniversary of the election.

Each outlet independently crunched the votes according to nine recount scenarios and published the findings simultaneously on November 12.

… The study’s key result: When the consortium tried to simulate a recount of all uncounted ballots statewide using six different standards for what constituted a vote, under each scenario they found enough new votes to have narrowly given the Florida election—and by extension the presidency—to Al Gore.

Under three models that attempted to duplicate the various partial recounts that were asked for by Gore or ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, however, Bush maintained a slight margin of victory.

Coverage of these remarkable results by the eight consortium members, as well as by other major news outlets reporting their work, was remarkably uniform. Findings were interpreted and framed to support and justify the political status quo, reflecting a post-September 11 media tendency to reassures a panicked public that the American system is still intact.’)

WP 17/12/00 ^{(year-long Washington Post investigation published 4 days aft Bush Jr. installed by US Supreme Court)} Joe Stephens “Where profits and lives hang in balance” Washington Post (17 December 2000)

(’A Washington Post investigation into corporate drug experiments in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America reveals a booming, poorly regulated testing system that is dominated by private interests and that far too often betrays its promises to patients and consumers.

Experiments involving risky drugs proceed with little independent oversight. Impoverished, poorly educated patients are sometimes tested without understanding that they are guinea pigs. And pledges of quality medical care sometimes prove fatally hollow, The Post found.

Drugmakers hop borders with scant government review. Largely uninspected by the Food and Drug Administration — which has limited authority and few resources to police experiments overseas — US-based drug companies are paying doctors to test thousands of human subjects in the Third World and Eastern Europe.

The companies use the tests to produce new products and new revenue streams, but they are also responding to pressure from regulators, Congress and lobbyists for disease victims to develop new medicines quickly.

By providing huge pools of human subjects, foreign trials help speed new drugs to the marketplace—where they will be sold mainly to patients in wealthy countries.

… At the time, Nigeria was run by a military government that had one of the world’s worst human rights and corruption records.

… Pfizer researchers prepared the study over six weeks, instead of the year or longer common in the United States.

… Ten doctors interviewed about Patient 0069’s death–including pediatricians, meningitis specialists and physicians who have practiced in developing countries–said they were troubled by her case.

… Pfizer’s Nigerian clinic opened and closed in a relative eye blink: About three weeks after the company’s team roared in with a chartered DC-9, the team roared out. Pfizer’s doctors returned once to examine the patients but did not track their long-term recovery.

“If I had the power,” said Doctors Without Borders physician Lodi, who watched the experiment unfold from across the compound, “I would take away their medical licenses.”

… Hopkins said he was confident of Trovan’s potency and that he pitched the plan to senior Pfizer executives by arguing, in part, that a humanitarian thrust in Nigeria could create a “halo” over their newest product.

… Creighton University pediatrics department Chairman Stephen Chartrand, said use of the oral drug under those circumstances would be “unconscionable.”

Yet the experiment quickly won clearance in Nigeria after what company records call an “independent review” by authorities there and the approval of a Kano hospital ethics committee.

“That was kind of a desperate time for them—they were happy to have anyone come in and do just about any kind of work,” Hopkins recalled of the Nigerian regime then in power.

… Pfizer did not require FDA approval to conduct the trial, he said. The company gave regulators a copy of their plan anyway, he said, and the agency granted permission to export Trovan to Nigeria.

… To reduce the pain after initial injections, the report said, researchers cut the volume of antibiotic given to children who were improving to one-third of the recommended amount. Pfizer said available data indicated the dose remained more than sufficient, but the drug’s manufacturer, Hoffmann-La Roche, said the reductions could have sapped the drug’s strength and skewed any comparison to Trovan.

“A high dose is essential,” Hoffmann-La Roche medical director Mark Kunkel said, stressing that he had no independent knowledge of the experiment. “Clinical failures . . . and perhaps deaths of children could have resulted from the low dosing.”

… “It would never be used like that in the United States,” Hopkins said. “The standard is IV [intravenous] therapy.”

… McCracken, the meningitis specialist, said that when he helped Pfizer conduct a subsequent experiment with injectable Trovan in the United States, Africa and Latin America, he crafted written rules to protect failing patients.

“That wouldn’t have happened in our study,” McCracken said of Patient 0069’s treatment. “Generally, if they don’t improve over the first 48 hours, they are switched out.”

… Pfizer’s researchers departed Kano after treating victims for about two weeks, leaving each child with a list of medications taken. Any child who remained ill was transferred across town to a better-equipped hospital, the company said.

But Lodi contends that Doctors Without Borders assumed care of some of the children and saw no medical records. The physicians could only guess how to continue treatment, he said.

Researchers asked the children to return in four to six weeks to ensure they remained healthy and free of side-effects. Less than half showed up, Dutse said.

… FDA inspectors traveled to Pfizer’s Groton, Conn., research campus to examine documents from Nigeria. Sorting through raw results recorded in Kano, inspectors discovered nearly four dozen discrepancies.

One document listed a child’s white blood cell count as 68; another pegged it at 680. Other records showed that some lab tests had been conducted in Kano when they actually were done in Connecticut, the FDA said, and Pfizer could not recall who recorded some of the data.

… Pfizer sponsored a February 1998 launch meeting in Orlando. More than 1,800 sales people rhythmically chanted “Tro-van, Tro-van, Tro-van,” a company magazine recounted. The company emblazoned its annual report with a photo of Hopkins and other Trovan team members.

The drug quickly became one of the most prescribed antibiotic brands in the United States. Pfizer reported that sales topped $160 million in Trovan’s first year and roughly 2.5 million adults had taken it by mid-1999.

But just as suddenly, regulators announced bad news. During 16 months on the market, there had been 140 reports of liver problems in Trovan patients. At least 14 suffered liver failure and six died.

… No one is quite sure what became of the rural children in the experiment.’)

WP 7/5/6 ^{(‘Nigeria’s version of FDA said it’d been unaware of experiment & “viewed the conduct of the trial by Pfizer as an act of deception & misuse of privilege”’)} Joe Stephens “Panel faults Pfizer in `96 clinical trial in Nigeria” Washington Post (7 May 2006)

(’The committee collected hundreds of documents and interviewed at least 26 people.

Pfizer had told authorities that a Nigerian doctor directed the experiment. The committee, however, found that researchers from Pfizer’s US office controlled the trial, and the inexperienced Kano doctor, Abdulhamid Isa Dutse, was the principal investigator “only by name.”

Publications listed Dutse as the lead author of articles on Trovan, but the committee found that depiction “did not sufficiently reflect his role.” Dutse indicated he was kept in the dark about the experiment’s results and said he did not see at least one publication until the committee showed it to him.

“He was shocked that Pfizer could publish such data without showing him or intimating him with details,” the report said, concluding that Dutse was “naive and exploited.”

The report quoted Dutse as saying that Pfizer’s motive was far from philanthropic.

“I have trusted people and am disappointed,” Dutse told the committee. “I regret this whole exercise, I wonder why on earth I did this.”

Dutse admitted that he created a letter after the experiment purporting to show that the test had been approved in advance by a Nigerian hospital’s ethics committee. He then backdated the letter to March 28, 1996 — a week before Pfizer’s experiment began.

Pfizer used the letter as a key justification for the trial in discussions with reporters and submitted it to the FDA.

… The former director of Nigeria’s version of the FDA said the agency had been unaware of the experiment. He told the panel that he “viewed the conduct of the trial by Pfizer as an act of deception and misuse of privilege.”

The report said the treatment of two children during the experiment represented unspecified “serious deviations” from the trial’s protocol and concluded that those deviations compromised their care.

One was a 10-year-old girl identified only as Patient No. 0069, who was given the experimental antibiotic for three days as her condition deteriorated. She died without receiving any other antibiotic.

Last week, Rep. Tom Lantos of California, the senior Democrat on the International Relations Committee, described the report’s findings as “absolutely appalling” and called on Pfizer to open its records.

“I think it borders on the criminal that the large pharmaceutical companies, both here and in Europe, are using these poor, illiterate and uninformed people as guinea pigs,” Lantos said.

The test came to public attention in December 2000, when The Post published the results of a year-long investigation into overseas pharmaceutical testing.’)

↩︎

Laird 2000 ^{(‘former Amoco lawyer founded 3 MLA-owned oil Co’s since`95; Nov`98: Havelock launched $8M new agency to fight eco-terrorism & organized gangs’)} Gordon Laird “Slippery dealings in the oil patch” Globe and Mail (3 March 2000): A13

(’During the first week of court proceedings in the Ludwig-Boonstra trial, it was presented in testimony that Alberta Energy Co. authored part of the RCMP investigation, funnelled funding to police and paid for travel expenses incurred by police informants.

Moreover, the company and the RCMP admit they co-operated in setting off bombs (allegedly to entrap Mr. Ludwig in a campaign of ecoterrorism, while keeping community members in the dark).

The blurred line between law enforcement and the oil business will undoubtedly draw more attention as the three-month trial progresses.

… Between 1992 and 1998, for example, Alberta cut funding to its energy regulator, the Energy and Utilities Board (EUB), by 28 per cent, despite a four-fold increase in drilled wells.

“The government has lost its capacity to provide a meaningful level of auditing and inspection coverage for oil and gas activities,” the Pembina Institute, an independent Alberta-based energy-related think-tank, noted in a report from February of last year.

In fact, when the Ludwig controversy reached full-blown proportions in the late 1990s, Alberta responded with new law-enforcement initiatives instead of much-needed regulatory reform.

In November of 1998, Alberta Justice Minister Jon Havelock launched an $8-million anti-crime crackdown by way of a new agency to fight eco-terrorism and organized gangs, announced just after Alberta Energy Co. requested the province’s help.

… It’s no secret that oil and gas royalties account for upwards of one-third of provincial revenues, or that energy companies are generous campaign donors to Mr. Klein’s Tories. It’s also no secret that the board of Alberta Energy Co. — Mr. Ludwig’s nemesis — is peppered with several distinguished Tory supporters who occasionally serve as personal advisors to the premier.

But who would have ever thought that Tory MLAs would operate their own oil wells, right alongside the very same companies they are sworn to regulate?

Code-named “Tory Oil,” a numbered company was incorporated in 1995 by Mr. Havelock with six other Tory MLAs, including two other cabinet ministers, Clint Dunford and Lyle Oberg. By 1997, this corporation had bought into five wells. As of October last year, five MLAs (but not Mr. Havelock) remained active partners in the venture.

Mr. Havelock, a former Amoco lawyer, has actually been a founding partner in three Tory MLA-owned oil companies since 1995. During his stint as justice minister, he was Canada’s only solicitor-general who was also the active president of his own oil company.

Surprisingly, Alberta’s ethics commissioner, Bob Clark, cleared Tory Oil of conflict charges in 1997. But what was never mentioned was that the justice minister had in 1996 accepted loan guarantees from Acanthus Resources Ltd., (corporate donor to Mr. Havelock’s own 1993 election campaign), for an oil company with Tory MLA Butch Fischer.

As documents show, the president of Acanthus is also a partner in the company and a personal Havelock donor.

Alberta’s conflict-of-interest legislation affords considerable latitude to elected officials in pursuit of personal gain. While many other Alberta MLAs place questionable assets in blind trust, no less than six current Tory cabinet ministers have active financial declared interests in oil securities or energy companies — including Gary Mar, Minister of the Environment. …

In fact, the overlap between Alberta’s Tory government and the energy sector runs well beyond the confines of Tory Oil.

It is possible, for example, to connect corporate relationships from Mr. Havelock’s family to a Nevada-based corporation, to several high-profile energy executives, a B.C. fishing lodge and back to Premier Ralph Klein, Mr. Havelock’s long-time associate from Calgary city council.

Here’s how it works: Mr. Havelock’s father, a retired oil executive, is currently a director in a Reno subsidiary of Beau Canada. Beau Canada is a Calgary-based oil company run by Thomas Bugg, a long-time Tory supporter and generous donor who helped fund Mr. Klein’s 1993 leadership campaign.

Mr. Bugg, in turn, is a director at Prism Petroleum, whose CEO is Scobey Hartley, is a core member of Ralph Klein’s kitchen cabinet. Mr. Hartley donated to Mr. Klein’s first leadership campaign. And Prism boasts Edmonton entrepreneur — and AEC board member — Mathew Baldwin as a corporate director.

In turn, several directors from Prism Petroleum, including Mr. Hartley and Mr. Bugg, co-own an exclusive B.C. fishing tourist lodge with Mr. Klein worth $1-million. Eagle Pointe was purchased in 1998 with business luminaries and campaign donors J.R. Shaw and Douglas Church.’)

Alberta Report 19/1/98_p.10 ^{(‘howls from the legal profession, but undaunted’)}_, 14 ^{(Reform MP Jason Kenney)} Joe Woodward “Rumblings of a counter-revolution: Alberta’s justice minister blames politicians for the rising tide of judicial activism” Alberta Report v25#5 (19 January 1998): 10-14

ASC 2001_p. 3 ^{(‘7-member ASC sub-committee established in Jun`98 to ensure public interest of oil & gas investors appropriately represented’)} Alberta Securities Commission Oil & Gas Securities Taskforce Report (24 January 2001): 32pp

(_p. 3: ’In June 1998, The Alberta Securities Commission announced the formation of a Taskforce. The stated goals were:

to develop … disclosure standards … to ensure that the public interest of investors and others is appropriately represented, and

to ensure that such standards are of such a quality that the industry and their advisers and investors will support them and all the securities commissions of Canada will adopt them.

… A Subcommittee of seven members was formed to identify information needed to meet the goals of the Taskforce and to provide input for matters to be considered by the Taskforce.’)

↩︎

EJ 11/4/99 ^{(“thru`50s &`60s Mannix Ltd. marched into post-war boom like a liberating army”; `62: Fred C suffered serious heart attack, but remained very much in control of The Outfit;`72: attempted kidnapping of Fred C’s wife; 9Dec`79: Fred C’s wife died of a heart attack; Mar`81: Fred C. laid low by serious stroke; 17Jun`97: Mannixes announce “Project Wild Rose” divestment project; Dec`98: 100th Anniversary & commemorative corp history fail to mention future)} Ric Dolphin “The Outfit: Alberta’s billionaire builders: Alberta’s richest family, the Mannixes, made their billions mining, building, and piping oil and gas. They’ve always been bold — whether it was in constructing an empire, guarding their privacy or sharing their wealth” Edmonton Journal (11 April 1999): B1ff

(’The Journal’s Ric Dolphin spent over two months looking into the lives and times of the mysterious and reclusive Calgary billionaires.

… Long a looming shadow atop the Calgary food chain, the family that made its billions building, mining and piping oil and gas out of western Canada, remains one of the four richest clans in Canada and certainly the richest in the province.

… So far Ron Mannix, who is credited with having increased the company’s assets threefold since becoming president of Loram in 1978, and Freddie, who plays polo, reads military history, shoots game and invests, have not provided many clues as to what they might do with all their money.

… Unlike a great many of the fortunes currently disappearing in Calgary, the Mannix billions were not made quickly.

Alberta’s oldest family firm, long known by its intimates as “The Outfit,” was carved out of the prairie earth at the close of the last century by the First Fred, more properly Frederick Stephen Mannix, Freddie and Ron’s granddad.

A Manitoba farmboy of Irish Protestant parentage, Frederick S. quit school at 14, bought a mule and a scraper and followed railway construction west, setting up shop first in Edmonton and then Calgary in 1917.

Frederick S. expanded into coal mining and heavy construction, eventually building roads and airfields and establishing a place for himself as a junior among the pantheon of Calgary’s rough-edged business founders that included the Burnses (meat packing), the McMahons (petroleum) and the Crosses (cattle).

… His father, tired and diabetic, had sold 51 per cent of the company in the early 1940s to the Idaho-based construction giant Morrison-Knudsen — one of the six builders of the Hoover Dam — on the condition that its owner Harry Morrison put Fred C. in charge of the Canadian subsidiary.

“The involvement with Morrison-Knudsen was the proving ground and the educational process that brought the Mannix organization into very big business,” says Hugh Martin, a friend and partner of Fred C.

“Fred C. was a protege of Harry Morrison. Harry had no children and he took a great liking to Fred C. He became almost a surrogate son to Harry Morrison.”

… In 1951, having emulated Harry Morrison’s policy of hiring the best people available, Fred C., aided by comptroller Eric Connelly, was able to buy back control of the company just before the death of his father at age 70.

The details — having to do with depreciation costs on the equipment — were complicated, but the net result was that Fred C. was able to buy out Morrison-Knudsen’s share in the old company, transfer operations to his new company, virtually eliminate taxes and have total control of Mannix Ltd. for the cost of a $2.2- million debenture paid off during the next 11 years.

Through the 1950s and 1960s Mannix Ltd. marched into the post-war boom like a liberating army.

… Under Fred C.’s generalship, The Outfit assembled an army of men and coterie of top-flight, well-paid lieutenants like future Alberta premier Peter Lougheed and future Trizec president Harold Milavsky who were asked to do the impossible and happily complied.

“You got up on a Saturday morning and you went to the office,” says Lougheed, now 70, who considers the years he spent with Mannix as a lawyer and later corporate secretary (1956-61) the best possible training ground for his later work staring down the federal government.

… Fred C. convinced Calgary Power, the province’s biggest utility (now TransAlta Utilities), to augment its hydroelectricity with coal-fired plants to meet the demand for power from an increased population and the electricity-hungry oil patch.

Alberta Coal’s monster draglines would soon be scooping up the lion’s share of lignite coal required by the thermal plants in both Alberta and Saskatchewan. According to BTO, Saskatchewan premier Tommy Douglas personally asked Mannix to bid on the contract to supply the Boundary Dam generating station near Estevan in 1956, the biggest coal mining contract ever tendered in Canada.

… Following the oil discoveries in Leduc in 1947, The Outfit had begun building pieces of major pipeline projects, including the Interprovincial, which took oil to central Canada.

This led, in 1954, to Mannix’s decision to enter the pipeline business, aided by an initiative of Social Credit premier Ernest Manning.

Manning, a friend of Edmontonian Frank O’Sullivan — partner with Mannix in a paving company — had decided to buck the tradition of letting one of the American oil producers also run the pipeline.

The all-Albertan Mannix was chosen to both build and operate the Pembina pipeline system from Canada’s richest oilfield, the area around the fledgling town of Drayton Valley, to the tank farms in Edmonton.

By 1957 Pembina Pipe Line Ltd. — the only Mannix company (54-per-cent family owned) that was ever publicly traded — was pumping 100,000 barrels a day of oil at a charge of 12 cents a barrel for an annual net revenue of $4.38 million.

(Pembina would later expand into oil and gas exploration and production, with wells all over Alberta and Saskatchewan, and offshore rigs in Lake Erie.)

… In 1957 the company was reorganized into four main divisions — construction, coal, pipelines, railway maintenance — under the new, forward-minded name Loram Group, an acronym derived from LOng RAnge Mannix.

Fred C. suffered a serious heart attack in 1962 and, on doctors’ orders, turned over the day-to-day running of The Outfit to his senior men. He remained, however, very much in control of the Loram Group as its chairman, and the companies continued to thrive.

… The Mannixes, and most especially Fred C., had always studiously avoided publicity to the point — it was said — of paying their public relations men to keep the Mannix name out of the paper and imposing fines if an unwanted mention occurred.

Fred C.’s former public relations chief David Wood, who later become premier Lougheed’s publicity and television adviser, claims such stories are apocryphal, but agrees the family has always been obsessed with its privacy.

… Fred C.’s mania for avoiding public scrutiny was certainly validated in 1972 after the 17-year-old daughter of Sam Hashman, a developer acquaintance, was held for ransom

The girl was rescued and the kidnappers jailed, but police later discovered the perpetrators’ preferred victim had been Margie Mannix. Luckily for Margie, the bad guys couldn’t find her.

… the government was prepared to pay $5 million for the expropriated portion. But the Mannixes took extreme exception to being ousted from the idyll they and their family had bought 28 years earlier for $40,000.

On Dec. 9, 1979, Margie Mannix died of a heart attack. In BTO her death is practically laid at the feet of Lougheed’s government. …

… During the mammoth, seven-month trial, more than a million dollars was spent on lawyers and every imaginable species of real estate and construction expert …

Sadly for Fred C., he had been laid low by a serious stroke in March of 1981. When it came time for him to testify that October, his speech was slurred, his energy seemed to have disappeared, and for the hour and a half that Fred C. Mannix made the most public appearance of his life, he looked and sounded lost.

… After lunch, Mannix was gone. Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Kenneth Moore asked Tavender whether he would have the chance to ask the plaintiff any further questions.

“We can certainly arrange for you to talk to him,” said Tavender. “I am a little nervous. He was in tears when he went out, so I assume there is some stress now.”

Mannix did not return to the stand.

… Surprisingly, during and after the expropriation fight, Lougheed remained a friend of the family and was in fact one of those who delivered a eulogy at Margie’s funeral.

… The frail Fred C. could no longer ski, dance or command the room when he spoke.

Florendine became as much a nursemaid as a wife, often at loose ends at how to occupy herself, and unsupported by her erstwhile take-charge husband at Mannix family functions.

… On June 17, 1997, the Mannix boys did something that struck many Calgarians as bordering on the madcap, something the secretive family had never done in the 99 years of The Outfit.

They held a press conference.

… “We are not selling for the sake of selling,” put in Freddie. “A final decision will depend on our detailed review and the nature of any offers received.”

Reporters’ questions on the worth of the companies and specific plans for the proceeds were deflected and presently the Mannixes and their president excused themselves and left through a back door, the ordeal over.

“Project Wild Rose,” as the divestiture process was christened, roared ahead through the summer and into the fall, with prospectuses prepared, data rooms opened and offers from other companies …

… “Their timing was great,” Royal Bank president and former Loram director John Cleghorn is quoted as saying in BTO.

“I only played poker with Ronnie once. He quoted his grandfather saying that ‘You can always tell how somebody conducts business by the way they play poker.’

I guess the other saying would be, ‘You got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them.’

“… So here they pick the top of the market in a period when commodity prices were jumping up and the market was very receptive. Their timing could not have been better — by a week.”

… The Mannix’s 100th birthday party at Jack Singer hall in December [1998] … was attended by the Alberta who’s who … There was, however, no talk about the future. Similarly the corporate history book [BTO] …

… If the empire is to be continued, Ron’s sons, who like their father have been working in the companies since their teens, should not be too far away from assuming a permanent role.

Charles, 22, a tall, red-headed young man currently completing university, has already shown some entrepreneurial spark running a bungee-jumping company in B.C.’)

↩︎

Canadian Business 29/1/99 ^{(“People in town know who I am. When I walk down the street with my partners, I really enjoy the admiration we get for a job well done. That actually means something”)} Peter Verburg “Big-game banker: Name any recent deal in the oil patch and Tom Budd probably helped finance it” Canadian Business v72#1 (29 January 1999): 74-76

(’not much can deter … Tom Budd … The Calgary investment banker … not even a near-death experience …

… Around Calgary and across Canada, he commands almost universal respect from friends and foes alike. People call him a “threshing machine,” a “pit bull” and a “prize-fighter” who operates with a “Mark Messier level of intensity.”

… Calgary lawyer and fellow racer Chris von Vegesack, who has worked on deals with Budd for seven years. “He is very skillful in extracting that extra nickel on behalf of an issuer … He’s a master of convincing people that red is black.”

Another Calgary lawyer, Greg Turnbull, talks about how “the sheer force of Tom’s personality” can affect a transaction. “He’s charismatic. He understands what motivates people …” …

… The popular perception of Budd is that he’s a risk-taker. In fact, he’s more like a professional gambler; he tries to eliminate as much risk as possible. …

… “I’ve never tried to conquer the world at once,” says Budd. “Some people say I take way more risks than I would have 15 years ago, but actually I take less risk now because I understand the market much better.”

… Budd has built up a loyal group of followers since arriving in Calgary. Tonken, the former head of Stampeder, is probably his most loyal customer.

… “One of Tom’s greatest attributes is he pulls no punches,” says Tonken. “He won’t promise to do something he can’t … That’s why people trust him. …” Tonken adds that Budd has never left him in a lurch. “He’s there in good times and bad.”

… None of his critics are willing to go on the record. One partner at a leading Calgary investment dealer had a few backhanded compliments:

“He’s got quite a reputation for getting the job done at all costs, but some of the deals have been disasters if you look at value creation on a per share basis. All Stampeder ever did was issued shares. That makes you bigger, but not worth more.”

This critic adds that Budd can be “abusive” at the negotiating table and “he’s got a really bad reputation among those who work close to him.”

… Daryl Connolly, president of Tikal Resources Ltd. in Calgary, says many investment bankers dislike Budd simply because he’s a tough negotiator.

“He goes right to the throat of the issue and challenges people to back up their stand,” says Connolly. “I’ve seen him make guys squirm in their chairs.”

… “I’ve got two partners that are better than me, and their names aren’t on the door,” says Budd. “People in town know who I am. When I walk down the street with my partners, I really enjoy the admiration we get for a job well done. That actually means something.”

… “He enjoys the competition and he gets the deal done,” says Connolly. “Or he’ll die trying.”’)

↩︎

EUB 2000d_p. 1 ^{(LLRv1: ‘based on recommendations of joint gov/industry Committee & endorsed by both CAPP + SEPAC’)} Alberta Energy and Utilities Board “Energy development licence transfer requirements and monthly corporate licensee liability rating” Interim Directive 2000-11 (24 October 2000): 12pp (available from AER library for fee)

(_p. 1: ’The purpose of these new liability management processes is to minimize the risk of unfunded abandonment and reclamation liabilities of well and facility licensees and to support the increased scope of the Orphan Fund.

These processes are based on recommendations of a joint government/industry Fund Advisory Committee and are endorsed by both the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and the Small Explorers and Producers Association of Canada.’)

Extra! 2002 ^{(’Gore won; coverage framed to support & justify political status quo’)} Miranda C. Spencer “Who won the election? Who cares? Florida recount consortium muffles results of months of efforts” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting Extra! v2002#1 (January 2002)

(’The study, dubbed a “double check on democracy” by the St. Petersburg Times (11/11/01), was spearheaded by a consortium of six major news organizations—the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Tribune Co. (parent of the L.A. Times), Associated Press and CNN—plus two Florida papers, the Palm Beach Post and St. Petersburg Times.

In an effort costing nearly $1 million in pooled funds and some 10 months’ work, the group rounded up uncounted ballots from all 67 Florida counties, then commissioned the University of Chicago’s nonpartisan National Opinion Research Center to examine them.

After numerous unforeseen delays and a unanimous decision to postpone publication “indefinitely” so reporters could be mobilized to cover the terrorist aftermath, the completed data were released to the consortium by NORC near the first anniversary of the election.

Each outlet independently crunched the votes according to nine recount scenarios and published the findings simultaneously on November 12.

… The study’s key result: When the consortium tried to simulate a recount of all uncounted ballots statewide using six different standards for what constituted a vote, under each scenario they found enough new votes to have narrowly given the Florida election—and by extension the presidency—to Al Gore.

Under three models that attempted to duplicate the various partial recounts that were asked for by Gore or ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, however, Bush maintained a slight margin of victory.

Coverage of these remarkable results by the eight consortium members, as well as by other major news outlets reporting their work, was remarkably uniform. Findings were interpreted and framed to support and justify the political status quo, reflecting a post-September 11 media tendency to reassures a panicked public that the American system is still intact.’)

Powell 1971_pp. 26-27 ^{(‘Neglected Opportunity in the Courts’)} Future Supreme Court Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. “Attack on American free enterprise system” Confidential Memorandum to US Chamber of Commerce education committee chairman Eugene B. Syndor Jr. (23 August 1971): 34pp

(_pp. 26-27: “American business and the enterprise system have been affected as much by the courts as by the executive and legislative branches of government.

Under our constitutional system, especially with activist-minded Supreme Court, the judiciary may be the most important instrument for social, economic and political change.

… This is a vast area of opportunity for the Chamber, if it is willing to undertake the role of spokesman for American business and if, in return, business is willing to provide the funds.

… The greatest care should be exercised in selecting the case in which to participate, or the suits to institute. But the opportunity merits the necessary effort.”)

AEAP 1996_p. 12 ^{(John Nichol’s resumé)} Alberta Environmental Appeal Board Sarg Oils Ltd. and Sergius Mankow v. Director of Land Reclamation, Alberta Environmental Protection Hearing for Appeal #94-011 (Edmonton, 5-6 November 1996) Report and Recommendations (5 December 1996): 25pp

(_p. 12: ’Mr. Nichol has been with the ERCB since 1970 [under premier Manning] in various regulatory functions involving oil and gas drilling and production.

In 1987 [under premier Getty] he was appointed Manager, Drilling and Production where he was responsible for coordination of the staff, operational, technical and financial aspects of licensing of the wells and production facilities.

These duties involved all technical matters related to equipping, drilling, completion and abandonment operations.

In March 1996 [under premier Klein], he was appointed to the position of Group Leader, Corporate Compliance, Facilities Division and in August 1996, he was appointed to the position of Division Leader, Utilities.

Mr. Nichol was one of two ERCB representatives on the Orphan Well Steering Committee and is currently chair of the successor committee, the Fund Advisory Committee.’)

Well Licence Subcommittee 1992_pp. 6 ^{(‘@ January 17th 1991 meeting, certain principles were advanced’)}_, 1, 7 ^{(‘growing fears of unmanageable future abandonment problems if issues are not addressed now’)} Well Licence Criteria Subcommittee “Specific criteria to be applied by the ERCB when a well license is issued or transferred” DRAFT (18 November 1992): 46pp (Available again from the AER library, which temporarily denied its collection included this report or anything related to Nichol 1991 {7 January 2022 correspondence w/ “Lisa” InformationRequest@aer.ca})

(_p. 6: ‘At a meeting held on 17 January 1991, certain principles were advanced as a basis for a program to address the abandonment of wells. The basic principle advanced was that an Abandonment Fund would be established by industry to pay for the share of downhole abandonment costs of insolvent or non-existent well licensees and working interest owners in a well.’)

(_pp. 1, 7: ’An increasing number of corporate insolvencies, bankruptcies and reluctant licensees, coupled with rationalization activities that are shifting assets between different sectors of the industry, are all contributing to growing fears of unmanageable future abandonment problems if issues are not addressed now.

… The number of transfer applications that appear to be an attempt to avoid abandonment responsibility, have increased in the past several years.

… The licensee profile has changed rapidly over the past 12 months.

There is an increasing number of new licence applicants who are relatively unsophisticated in the industry, with limited understanding of the obligations and risks associated with holding a licence.

… An increasing number of licence applicants have inadequate financial resources to meet future well-abandonment liabilities.

In many cases, the applicant does not recognize that such a responsibility exists.

… In a number of recent cases, well-licence transferors have disposed of valuable assets, leaving only liabilities within a corporate shell and thereby generating future orphan wells.

… There is an increasing incidence of new licence applicants who have a previous record of corporate deficiencies, both within direct and associated companies.

Deficiencies include failure to respond to ERCB directives, unpaid surface/mineral lease rentals, etc.”)

NYT 23/3/91 ^{(Bush I & 1991 Gulf War)} Maureen Dowd “Bush moves to control war’s endgame” New York Times (23 February 1991): 1, 5

(’Mr. Bush decided that he would rather gamble on a violent and potentially unpopular ground war than risk the alternative: an imperfect settlement hammered out by the Soviets and Iraqis that world opinion might accept as tolerable.

… Mr. Bush reversed the conventional wisdom by insisting that a ground war could be a quicker route to peace than a negotiation …

… “People underestimated George Bush’s determination to make good on what he said Aug. 4, that ‘this will not stand,’” a senior Bush adviser said.

“He wants this thing rolled back. He doesn’t want Saddam to have a graceful retreat. He doesn’t want him to be able to go back into Kuwait in six months. He doesn’t want a compromise solution. He doesn’t want Saddam Hussein to save face. Bush wants to win.”

… At each stage of the Persian Gulf crisis, President Bush has been willing to move further and faster than anyone expected.

… Until he took on Mr. Hussein, Mr. Bush had a reputation as a leader who loped rather than swaggered, a politician who labored over decisions and preferred a split-the-difference, middle-of-the-road approach.

… The Bush Administration may be annoyed that the Soviet Union has elbowed its way into the coda of the war. … the President “told Gorbachev, nicely, to bug off,” a top Administration official said.

… The White House was as tense as it has been on other landmark days, such as those of the Cuban missile crisis and Jimmy Carter’s failed effort to rescue American hostages in Iran in 1980, longtime Washington analysts said.

… When Mr. Bush, in his first months in office, he ordered a review of national security policy, Pentagon and CIA officials warned …

“In cases where the US confronts much weaker enemies, our challenge will be not simply to defeat them, but to defeat them decisively and rapidly … For small countries hostile to us, bleeding our forces in protracted or indecisive conflict or embarrassing us by inflicting damage on some conspicuous element of our forces may be victory enough, and could undercut political support for US efforts against them.”’)

Nichol 1991_pp. 1-4^{(“as regulators, we are well aware that regulation is not always the most efficient way of getting things done”)} John R. Nichol “Orphan wells: Who is responsible, for how long, and at what cost?” Canadian Association of Drilling Engineers/Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors Spring Drilling Conference (Calgary: 10-12 April 1991) Paper #91-30: 6pp (finally available from AER library for fee)

(_pp. 1-4: “For the last three years a joint task force composed of representatives from industry … and the financial community have been reviewing the question of responsibility for wells in general, with a view to reducing the number of orphan wells and the associated cost to the people of Alberta.

This paper reviews the history of this work.

… Clearly, if the people of Alberta were going to have to pay some significant amount toward solving this problem, they would look to the Board to develop stricter abandonment and suspension regulations to permit it.

But as regulators, we are well aware that regulation is not always the most efficient way of getting things done.

… ERCB … philosophical approach … motivated by … the large companies selling properties (low producing wells) to stripper operators that may produce them to their economic limit … but who then may be unable or unwilling to abandon the wells properly.

That could result in those wells becoming a public liability.

… Another of the Board’s objectives with respect to the suspended/inactive well population was … to reduce the number of wells in this category, particularly those wells that have no potential or remaining asset value … and that should be abandoned now rather than be left sitting until they become orphans.

… There has been an increasing number of well blowouts or uncontrolled flows associated with suspended/inactive wells over the last few years“)

EUB 2000e ^{(Aft Bush II installed: ‘numerous expressions of concern regarding the implementation + application + impact of LLRv1’)} Alberta Energy and Utilities Board “Clarification: Energy development licence transfer requirements and monthly corporate licensee liability—ID 2000-11 and Guide 69” General Bulletin #2000-28 (18 December 2000): 1p (available from AER library for fee)

(’Since the release of these documents the EUB has received numerous questions and expressions of concern regarding the implementation, application, and impact of these programs. …

… The EUB recognizes that there are a number of small oil and gas companies that are not represented by either CAPP or SEPAC.

The EUB wants to hear from as broad a spectrum of the oil and gas industry as possible before it finalizes the requirements of these new screening mechanisms.

The EUB encourages these interested and affected parties to provide their feedback in writing by February 15, 2001.

Please direct correspondence to the undersigned or contact the Corporate Compliance Group of the Compliance and Operations Branch at (403) 297-8167.

<Original signed by>

John Nichol, P. Eng.

Executive Manager

Compliance and Operations Branch’)

NYT 23/1/1 ^{(‘by 2010, 2M bbls/day to be pumped from here into a North American pipeline network that stretches from Portland, Ore., to Portland, Me.’)} James Brooke “Digging for oil: Canada is unlocking petroleum from sand” New York Times (23 January 2001): C1ff

(’Canada — long the largest foreign supplier of natural gas and electricity to the United States — is … now … becoming important in oil as well.

During the first 10 months of 2000, Canada edged out Saudi Arabia as America’s largest outside source of oil and petroleum products.

For the United States, where domestic production has dropped by 40 percent since 1970, increased Canadian oil production means increased energy security; trade treaties lock Canada and United States into a continental energy market.

Last year, the United States imported foreign oil to meet 57 percent of its needs, up from 37 percent in 1975.’)

DOB 24/1/1 ^{(‘CAPP expresses “deep concern” over LLRv1 asking “far in excess of amounts deemed by industry to be appropriate”’)} Elsie Ross “CAPP calls for deferral of changes to orphan fund” Nickle’s Daily Oil Bulletin (24 January 2001)

(’In a letter to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, … [Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers] CAPP President William Friley expressed his group’s “deep concern” about the apparent consequences of the Liability Management Plan developed under the direction of the Orphan Fund advisory committee.

… Friley urged the advisory committee to defer implementation of the Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) pending a review of the existing formula.

… The new rating system isn’t scheduled to take effect until after Feb. 21 … After that, the board planned to consult industry on establishing the thresholds for the rating criteria.

… However, recent data demonstrates that the current formula will result in deposit requirements “far in excess of amounts deemed by industry to be appropriate for the fund,” [Friley] said.

“We are concerned this is going to tie up way too much money in deposits and that was never the intent of the (Orphan Well) program,” added David Pryce, CAPP’s manager of operations and environment.

… “A number of our people are saying they are going to be out of business because of these rules,” said Tim Presber, a SEPAC director and representative on the fund advisory committee.

“Other companies will be financially hobbled as money will be tied up in security deposits.”

… CAPP also wants the board to discontinue the Transfer Licensing Rating once the corporate system is functioning properly.

… Friley’s letter followed last week’s release by the EUB of detailed information on the economic limits of all reservoirs which enabled operators to determine their potential liability.

… Pryce said the association believes there is a need for more work on how the formulas work, which includes what the economic limits (EL) are and how they are applied.

… Bob Curran, a board spokesman, said … there are no plans at this time to indefinitely defer the LLR.

… In the October 2000 interim directive in which it outlined changes to liability management, the EUB said the processes were based on the recommendations of the advisory committee and endorsed by both CAPP and SEPAC.

Pryce, though, said that until recently CAPP didn’t have the information to understand precisely how the ratings would be calculated.

“The devil is in the details,” he suggested.’)

↩︎

Dewey 1931 ^{(‘politics as shadow cast on society by big business’)} John Dewey “The breakdown of the old order” New Republic v66 (25 March 1931): 115-16 in John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925-1953 v6:1931-1932 (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University 2006): 161-64

ASC 2001_p. 3 ^{(‘ensure standards are such that industry & their advisers & investors will support them + all the securities commissions of Canada will adopt them’)} Alberta Securities Commission Oil & Gas Securities Taskforce Report (24 January 2001): 32pp

(_p. 3: ’BACKGROUND In June 1998, The Alberta Securities Commission announced the formation of a Taskforce. The stated goals were:

to develop … disclosure standards … to ensure that the public interest of investors and others is appropriately represented, and

to ensure that such standards are of such a quality that the industry and their advisers and investors will support them and all the securities commissions of Canada will adopt them.

The Taskforce is comprised of 27 individuals involved in the oil and gas industry, including accountants, company executives, independent petroleum evaluators, lawyers and securities analysts.

A Subcommittee of seven members was formed to identify information needed to meet the goals of the Taskforce and to provide input for matters to be considered by the Taskforce.

To January 24, 2001 the Subcommittee held 45 meetings and the Taskforce met 19 times.

In addition, five meetings with some reserves evaluators and five meetings with some issuers were held to ensure that their concerns were considered.

The Taskforce presents for consideration by the Canadian Securities Administrators (the “CSA”) the following recommended standards.

Existing oil and gas disclosure rules, regulations and policies would be replaced by these requirements.’)

Harper, Flanagan, Morton, Knopff, Crooks & Boessenkool 2001 ^{(Alberta Firewall letter)} National Citizens’ Coalition President Stephen Harper, professor of political science and former Reform Party of Canada director of research Tom Flanagan, professor of political science and Alberta Senator-elect Ted Morton, professor of political science Rainer Knopff, Canadian Taxpayers Federation Chairman Andrew Crooks, former policy adviser to Treasurer of Alberta [Stockwell Day] Ken Boessenkool “An open letter to Ralph Klein: Re: The Alberta agenda” National Post (24 January 2001): A14↩︎

NP 10/9/2 ^{(‘chairman of ASC task force on oil & gas resigned after reading draft NI 51-101’)} Paul Haavardsrud “ASC task force chairman resigns” National Post (10 September 2002): FP1ff

(’Henry Lawrie, chairman of an Alberta Securities Commission task force on the oil and gas industry, has resigned as an advisor to the ASC over concerns the commission will change his task force’s recommendations on how companies report oil reserves.

… Mr. Lawrie, a former chief accountant at the ASC who has acted as an advisor to the commission since the task force wrapped up, resigned last Thursday, after reading a draft copy of the proposed rule, known as National Instrument 51-101.

“I’m worried that if [the changes] go through that way I don’t want to be associated with it,” said Mr. Lawrie.

Mr. Lawrie declined to discuss the changes that caused him the most concern.

His task force said oil and gas companies should be required to use independent evaluators, appoint a committee of the board to review estimates, and adhere to a much more stringent set of requirements before reserves can be booked as “proved.”

Yesterday, an ASC spokesman declined to comment on the reasons for Mr. Lawrie’s resignation.

“The task force [provided] an excellent blue print and we’re moving on from there,” said David Linder, executive director at the ASC.

… “It’s obvious everybody didn’t think everything we said in the rule was fantastic so we’re giving consideration to their input and we’ll move from there,” Mr. Linder said.

Investors had high hopes the task force, made up of many well-respected industry figures, would bring forward recommendations that would help the industry evaluate oil and gas reserves better than the existing national policy.

Faulty, and at times, outright fraudulent reserve estimates have given the industry a black eye in the past, as investors and companies alike have been scorched by inaccurate reserve reports.

Mr. Lawrie said he will be disappointed if the findings of the task force are shunted aside by the commission.’)

G&M 26/1/8 ^{(‘aft April 9th, when US talked oil, they would be counting 175B bbls of AB’s bitumen’)} Erin Anderssen, Shawn McCarthy and Eric Reguly “Shifting sands: How Alberta’s oil boom changed Canada forever” pt1: “An empire from a tub of goo: How did the quest to retrieve the treasure hidden beneath huge swaths of northern Alberta go from fool’s errand to monumentous payoff?” Globe and Mail (26 January 2008): F1, F4-5

Brezina & Gilmour 2003_pp. 32, 39 ^{(‘does not appear to be any direct risk of liability to directors, officers or controlling shareholders for abandonment liabilities of corp’)} Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Counsel Danielle Brezina and Bennett Jones LLP Associate Bradley Gilmour “Protecting and supporting the Orphan Fund: Recent legislative changes and AEUB policy amendments designed to address unfunded liabilities of oil and gas facilities in Alberta” Alberta Law Review v41#1 (July 2003): 29-47

(_pp. 32, 39: ’Section 20.1 was repealed with the amendments, so under the amended OGCA there does not appear to be any direct risk of liability to directors, officers or controlling shareholders for the abandonment liabilities of the corporation.

… Under the amended OGCA, directors and officers have no direct personal liability for suspension or abandonment costs’)

DOB 19/8/3 ^{(‘Oct`03 field inspections no longer required to certify reclamation, standards of which are not necessarily going to get tightened up’; landowners “don’t support this at all”)} “Alberta environment revising reclamation certificate procedures” Nickle’s Daily Oil Bulletin (19 August 2003)

(’Effective Oct. 1, 2003, Alberta Environment inspectors will no longer conduct field inspections before issuing a certificate.

… The department will audit about 15% of certified sites — about 900 — each year with thorough field inspections. It will select both operators that have presented problems in the past as well as companies chosen at random, she said.

While the 1995 reclamation criteria for wellsites and associated facilities will be applied initially, the department is working with stakeholders to develop new criteria. … the department is not necessarily going in with the intention of tightening up its requirements …

… Landowners also have concerns about the changes in procedure, said Tony Nichols of Castor, president of the Federation of Surface Landowners. “We just don’t support this at all,” he said.

… One of the biggest frustrations for landowners has been the difficulty tracking down the current operator on their property in the wake of mergers and acquisition activity over the last several years, he said.

“When the onus was on the government that they had to make sure with the inspectors that things were A-OK and the public purse covered it after five years they were vigilant about what was down there.”’)

OCI 2023_p. 2 ^{(‘proportion of coal + oil + gas reserves left in ground w/i 1.5°C limit increased from nearly 40% in`18 to almost 60% in`23’)} Kelly Trout “Sky’s Limit data update: Shut down 60% of existing fossil fuel extraction to keep 1.5°C in reach” Oil Change International Briefing (16 August 2023): 6pp

(_p. 2: ’Using updated 2023 data, the proportion of coal, oil, and gas reserves that must remain unextracted to meet the 1.5°C limit has increased from nearly 40% in 2018 to almost 60% in 2023.

As of 2023, developed oil and gas reserves alone, if fully extracted, would cause cumulative carbon emissions nearly 25% greater than the world’s remaining 1.5°C carbon budget. Thus, even in the theoretical scenario where coal mining stops immediately, developed oil and gas reserves alone could push the world beyond 1.5°C.

A significant portion — almost one-fifth (20%) — of oil and gas fields must be shut down, even if no new fields are developed and coal extraction stops tomorrow.’)

OCI 2022_p. 9 ^{(‘almost 40% of developed reserves cannot be burned to stay within 1.5 ◦C budget (50%)’)} Kelly Trout, Greg Muttitt, Dimitri Lafleur, Thijs Van de Graaf, Roman Mendelevitch, Lan Mei and Malte Meinshausen [Oil Change International] “Existing fossil fuel extraction would warm the world beyond 1.5°C” Environmental Research Letters v17#6 (June 2022) #064010: 12pp

(_p. 9: ’Based on our median estimate, almost 40% of developed reserves cannot be burned (or must be abated) to stay within the 1.5°C budget (50%).

This goes beyond the IEA (2021) finding that new oil and gas fields are not needed in a 1.5°C scenario.

Our findings suggest that, absent large-scale CDR, a significant portion of existing fields and mines must be decommissioned before their reserves are depleted, stranding not only some of their carbon but also invested capital.

The question of which developed coal, oil and gas reserves should be decommissioned and which ‘fit’ within the 1.5°C carbon budget is one that goes beyond this study’s scope.

It requires considerations of equity and of the best mechanisms to manage a just transition away from fossil fuel jobs and revenues within and between countries (Muttitt and Kartha 2020, Pye et al 2020).

By extending the implication of our results to 2°C scenarios, we also find that the world is very close to a ‘point of no return’ past which no new fields and mines can be developed without jeopardising the well below 2°C limit …

The policy implications of committed CO2 emissions from developed reserves exceeding the 1.5°C carbon budget are twofold:

(a) all undeveloped reserves may be considered unextractable; and

(b) constraining production of already developed coal, oil and gas reserves within 1.5°C is likely to require policy interventions beyond price signals.’)

OSC 2003 ^{(Imperial Italics characterize the fraud, which takes nothing more than a careful reading to unveil)} National Instrument 51-101: Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities Ontario Securities Commission Bulletin v26#6615 (26 September 2003): 72pp

CNN 17/9/4 ^{(Sept`04: ‘Rampant “epidemic” of financial crimes in mortgage industry, which if not curtailed, could become “next S&L crisis” FBI warns’)} Terry Frieden “FBI warns of mortgage fraud ‘epidemic’” CNN (17 September 2004)

(’Rampant fraud in the mortgage industry has increased so sharply that the FBI warned Friday of an “epidemic” of financial crimes which, if not curtailed, could become “the next S&L crisis.”

Assistant FBI Director Chris Swecker said the booming mortgage market, fueled by low interest rates and soaring home values, has attracted unscrupulous professionals and criminal groups whose fraudulent activities could cause multibillion-dollar losses to financial institutions.

“It has the potential to be an epidemic,” said Swecker, who heads the Criminal Division at FBI headquarters in Washington. “We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,” he said.’)

↩︎

AP 14/5/91 ^{(QEII on Gulf War: “a vivid & effective demonstration of the long-standing alliance between our 2 countries”)} “Queen talking hat speech” Associated Press Archive (14 May 1991): 44s

Finkelstein 2010_pp. 47-52 ^{(‘Israel broke June 2008 ceasefire on US election day’)} Norman Finkelstein ‘This Time We Went Too Far’: Truth and consequences of the Gaza invasion New York: OR 2010

Finkelstein 2018_pt. 5 ^{(’“22 days of death and destruction” ended on January 17th 2009)} Norman Finkelstein “The ”Big Lie” about Gaza is that the Palestinians have been the aggressors” Democracy Now! (19 January 2018)

(_pt. 5: “Operation Cast Leads begins December 26th, 2008, ends January 17th, 2009—what Amnesty International called “22 days of death and destruction.”

There’s a ceasefire implemented in June 2008. Israeli official and unofficial organizations say Hamas was careful to respect the ceasefire. Hamas was careful to respect the ceasefire.

Israel, however, it’s preparing, it’s preparing, it’s preparing for its attack on Gaza to revenge Lebanon.

When all the pieces are in place—they spent about a year of preparation. When all the pieces are in place, they need a pretext. Well, they look around for a pretext.

And they wait ’til November 4th, the historic election, when Barack Obama is voted into office. They know all the cameras are riveted on the White House, riveted on the United States.

And then they go in, kill six Hamas militants, knowing full well that there’s going to be a reaction. And from that point on, it descends into tit for tat, and then, on December 26, begins the assault.

It ends January 17th. And for the time—for the time, it was by far the biggest Israeli massacre committed against Gaza.

And you have to bear in mind—I’m not sure how vivid your memory is, even mine is beginning to fade on it, and I study it, you know, pretty closely—public opinion radically shifted against Israel after Operation Cast Lead.

It created a huge international uproar.”)

ADL 2016 ^{(‘Israel announced it was unilaterally ending its operation in Gaza on January 17th 2009’)} Anti-Defamation League “Operation Cast Lead (Gaza) – December 2008 — January 2009” Backgrounder (September 2016)

(’On January 17, Israel announced it was unilaterally ending its operation in Gaza.

Israel’s decision to undertake this unilateral ceasefire followed the January 16 signing of a “Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Israel Regarding Prevention of the Supply of Arms and Related Materiel to Terrorist Groups”.

The MOU, signed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Israel Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni provided Israel with the assurance that the United States would be a partner in preventing the flow of arms and military equipment to Hamas.

… By January 21, all Israeli troops had left Gaza.’)

Nesbit 2016 ^{(‘essential pillars of Tea Party movement network all funded & in place by spring of 2009’)} Former communications official at the Federal Drug Administration and George H.W. Bush White House, then Climate Nexus Executive Director Jeff Nesbit “The secret origins of the Tea Party: How Big Oil and Big Tobacco partnered with the Koch brothers to take over the GOP” Time (13 May 2016)

(’According to publicly available IRS records, the five essential pillars of just such a Tea Party movement network were all funded and in place by that spring of 2009:

the Sam Adams Alliance to direct grassroots efforts;

the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity to direct propaganda efforts in state capitals across the United States;

the State Policy Network to coordinate funding and free-market policies at state-based think tanks;

hundreds of grants from the Koch foundations to American universities that were linked in through SPN;

and, of course, CSE’s successor, Americans for Prosperity, built to coordinate the effort nationally.’)

Felkerson 2011 ^{(‘extraordinary scope & magnitude of 2007–09 financial crisis required extraordinary response by the Fed in fulfillment of its lender-of-last-resort function. The paper concludes the Federal Reserve bailout committed >$29 trillion’)} James Felkerson “$29,000,000,000,000: A detailed look at the Fed’s bailout by funding facility and recipient” Levy Economics Institute Working Paper #698 (December 2011): 36pp

Kramer, Michalowski & Roth 2005 ^{(‘war of aggression is the Supreme International Crime’)} Ronald Kramer, Raymond Michalowski and Dawn Roth “”The Supreme International Crime”: How the US war in Iraq threatens the rule of law” Social Justice v32#2 (2005): 52-81↩︎

CH 9/5/14 ^{(oilpatch hagiography)} Tony Seskus “Oil hunters usher in a new era: Leduc strike solidifies Alberta’s place as oil giant” Calgary Herald (9 May 2014): B1ff

Cohn, Fehr & Maréchal 2014_p. 88 ^{(‘prevailing business culture in the banking industry favours dishonest behaviour’)} Alain Cohn, Ernst Fehr, and Michel André Maréchal “Business culture and dishonesty in the banking industry” Nature v516#7529 (19 November 2014): 86-89

Marion, Massicotte & Duhn 2014_{pp. 352, 346, 343 + n113} ^{(‘vendors attempt to pass risks associated w/ oil & gas assets down the chain of title & this strategy will likely be effective in many cases; in the end, provinces & regions may be responsible for costs of aging infrastructure where a Co. is insolvent’)} Michael A. Marion, Michael G. Massicotte and Jessica L. Duhn “Canada’s aging oil and gas infrastructure: Who will pay? The public and private cost recovery frameworks” Alberta Law Review v52#2 (December 2014): 331-63

(_{pp. 352, 346, 343 + n113}: ’Historically, the Canadian oil and gas industry has followed the caveat emptor principle by which vendors attempt to pass risks associated with oil and gas assets, including Environmental Costs, down the chain of title through conveyances, assignments, novations, industry agreements, and contractual indemnities.

… this strategy will likely be effective in many cases …

… Tracking ownership can be complicated by lost records, poor record-keeping, changing operators and operator practices, insolvency of working interest participants or co-owners, and even the long-standing perpetuation of mistakes in the administration of the assets.

These issues are heightened for aging infrastructure. For example, the historical tracking of the ownership of field gathering systems [pipelines] has been inconsistent at best and, in some cases, is non-existent.

As such industry infrastructure ages and requires expenditure of Environmental Costs in the future, there will likely be significant litigation over who owns the infrastructure, which contracts govern, and who is responsible to pay for Environmental Costs.

… In the end, the provinces and regions may be responsible for the costs of aging infrastructure where a company is insolvent.

This liability is subject to being offset to the extent access is available to “orphan funds,” established for the purpose of paying costs related to suspension, abandonment, remediation, and reclamation of orphaned facility sites or wells.*

* OGCA … Part 11; The Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations, 2012 RRS, c O-2, Reg 6; Man OGA … BC OGAA … In Alberta, a well, facility, or pipeline in the Licensee Liability Rating Program (LLRP) is eligible to be declared an orphan when the licensee becomes insolvent or defunct, and the AER designates it as such (provided it meets the criteria outlined in section70(2) of OGCA), at which time it will be considered an orphan for all aspects of the LLRP: suspension, abandonment, remediation, and reclamation.’)

CBC 17/12/14 “9 Wildrose MLAs, including Danielle Smith, cross to Alberta Tories: Progressive Conservative members say they’re willing to look beyond past grievances” CBC News (17 December 2014)

(’Nine Wildrose MLAs, including leader Danielle Smith, have crossed to Alberta’s governing Progressive Conservative party in a move political observers are calling unprecedented.

Premier Jim Prentice made the announcement late Wednesday afternoon after a day-long meeting, where PC MLAs voted in favour of bringing the new members into caucus. 

“This is not a merger of parties, let’s be clear about this,” he said in a joint news conference with Smith.  “This is a unification of conservatives as Progressive Conservatives.”

Those crossing the floor are: 

Danielle Smith (Highwood).

Rob Anderson (Airdrie).

Gary Bikman (Cardston-Taber-Warner)

Rod Fox (Lacombe-Ponoka)

Jason Hale (Strathmore-Brooks)

Bruce McAllister (Chestermere-Rocky View)

Blake Pedersen (Medicine Hat)

Bruce Rowe (Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills)

Jeff Wilson (Calgary-Shaw)

Smith said she was joining the party because Prentice’s values were similar to the Wildrose. She and the other 8 MLAs decided to cross after agreeing to a set of “aligned values and principles.”’)

CBC 20/12/14 Susana Mas “Danielle Smith defends floor crossing as ‘a victory’ for Wildrose Party: Wildrose caucus touted merger options as Danielle Smith criticized defectors” CBC News (20 December 2014)↩︎

ICSID 2015_{p. 63 (para. 178)} ^{(‘Canada shall pay Mobil Canada & Murphy Oil respectively $10,310,605 & $2,273,635’)} International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes In The Arbitration Under Chapter Eleven of the North American Free Trade Agreement Between Mobil Investments Canada Inc. & Murphy Oil Corporation and Canada ICSID Case #ARB(AF)/07/4 (20 February 2015): 65pp

(_{p. 63 (para. 178)}: ’On the basis of the foregoing, the Tribunal decides:

a. That Canada shall pay Mobil Canada and Murphy Oil respectively CDN$ 10,310,605 and CDN$ 2,273,635 as compensation for incremental expenditures.

These amounts shall bear interest at the 12-month Canadian Dollar LIBOR rate + 4%, compounded monthly, from July 23, 2012 to the date of this Award.

b. That Canada shall pay Mobil Canada and Murphy Oil respectively CDN$ 3,582,408 and CDN$ 1,127,612 as compensation for shortfall.’)

Provost & Kennard 2023_{pp. 57, 232n24} ^{(Canada @ ICSID)} Claire Provost and Matt Kennard Silent Coup: How corporations overthrew democracy London: Bloomsbury Academic 2023

Scotiabank 2015_p. 1 ^{(‘NDP election a water shed event that could lead to potential royalty regime changes’)} Scotiabank “Notley Crüe: Time for change brings same ol’ situation” Equity Research Industry Report (8 May 2015): 29pp

(_p. 1: ’The ending of the Progressive Conservative (PC) dynasty in the province is a watershed event; the PCs were in power since 1971, and before that the province exhibited minimal appetite for change as the Social Credit party ruled back to 1935.

The NDP’s defeat of the PCs therefore represents the end of an unparalleled four-decade-long incumbency by the PCs but also points to changes in the energy industry.

A time for change in government in Alberta is a new phenomenon, but initiatives of late to alter the fiscal regime are not new.

In this publication we have taken the opportunity to

(1) review the NDP’s platform with respect to energy policy positions;

(2) consider the recent history of royalty framework adjustments in Alberta;

(3) consider the potential implications for producer royalties and corporate taxation;

(4) highlight the Alberta- and non-Alberta-based production of our coverage companies;

(5) consider the Alberta Crown versus fee title interests of our coverage companies;

(6) consider the impact on the large cap and energy service sector;

(7) provide a sense for valuation impacts on our coverage companies; and

(8) consider the strategic themes and implications of potential policy changes.’)

2016 ABQB 278_{pp. 18 (para. 53)} ^{(‘OWA submits liabilities paid out of estate in advance of other creditors is not a matter of super priority’)}_{, 19 (paras. 64-65)} ^{(CAPP’s fictional claims)}_{, 22 (para. 81)} ^{(’AER’s claimed ATB knew the risks associated w/ Redwater including the abandonment liabilities; ATB submits that is irrelevant’)}_{, 32 (para. 130)} ^{(BIA s. 14.06)} Redwater Energy Corporation (Re) Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta Reasons for Judgment #278 (17 May 2016): 58pp

(_{p. 18 (para. 53)}: ‘The OWA submits that the fact that these liabilities are paid out of the estate of a debtor in advance of other creditors is not a matter of super priority, but rather a matter of ensuring the preservation of a cohesive and expansive regulatory regime with benefits and obligations.’)

(_{p. 19 (paras. 64-65)}: ’CAPP adds that when funds are advanced to companies, they are lent against all of the assets including the benefits and the burdens, and which means the value in the production as well as the obligation to clean-up after production is completed. CAPP argues that, as a result, no unfairness arises.

CAPP submits that if the Court accepts the Trustee’s argument, the whole regime around the Orphan Well fund will need to be revisited and may even collapse.’)

(_{p. 22 (para. 81)}: ’Answering the AER’s submission that the ATB knew the risks associated with advancing funds to Redwater including the abandonment liabilities, the ATB submits that this is irrelevant.

… The ATB adds that the only thing it had in its possession regarding abandonment liabilities was a reserve report.’)

(_{p. 32 (para. 130)}: ’Although section 14.06 specifically addresses the issue of personal liability, this type of liability is not, in my opinion, a condition precedent to the right to disclaim.

The Trustee rightly mentions subparagraph (4)(c) where Parliament, concerned with the receiver’s or trustee’s right to disclaim, removed any doubt of possible ex post facto liability where environmental orders are subsequently issued.’)

2017 ABCA 124_{pp. 32 (paras. 97-99)} ^{(‘appellants argue there is no unfairness in subordinating the Alberta Treasury Branches’ position to Redwater’s environmental obligations’)}_{, 33 (para. 105)} ^{(‘fears of corp insolvencies merely for avoiding environmental liabilities are exaggerated’)} Orphan Well Association v. Grant Thornton Limited Court of Appeal of Alberta Reasons for Judgment #124 (24 April 2017): 74pp

(_{p. 32 (paras. 97-99)}: ‘the appellants argue, there is no unfairness in subordinating the Alberta Treasury Branches’ position to Redwater’s environmental obligations.

Alberta Treasury Branches knew of these risks, assessed them in its creditworthiness analysis, and should not now be able to complain that they have come to fruition.

Fairness is perhaps in the eye of the beholder, but this argument cannot succeed.

… Whether this is fair or not is not the issue, because the BIA and the general law of priority of claims expressly recognize the priority of secured claims.’)

(_{p. 33 (para. 105)}: ’the argument that the decision of the chambers judge would motivate corporate reorganizations and insolvencies merely for the purpose of avoiding environmental liabilities … these fears are exaggerated.

Further, there is enough judicial discretion in the insolvency regime to prevent abuses.’)