Take the money

Dear Republic:

Kevin Potvin's overview of our oil dependent global economy [Republic issue 123] fails to mention that the biggest increased demand in the near future will come from Asia, in particular India and China with their booming middle classes.

This, along with long-term depletion in world reserves, will drive up prices, first gradually then dramatically as supplies actually run out in about half a century. By then countries that have made the necessary infrastructure changes towards renewable energy sources will survive the crisis, while those that are still hydrocarbon dependent will go belly up, or be caught up in oil wars.

Canada is in the enviable position of being one of the few nations with as yet untapped oil and gas reserves, and with the potential of using that wealth to make the transition to the solar age as smooth as possible. But as Potvin points out, that means more oil revenue will have to be allocated towards alternative energy development, rather than the present profit maximizing scenario.

To make that happen, Canadians must pressure municipal governments, and Ottawa, to force oil money re-investment. Provinces, typically bent on the "cash cow" approach towards resource extraction, will be harder to get onside, as the case of greedy Alberta exemplifies. Then there's also the threat of the US co-opting our fossil fuel supplies, signs of which are already happening with the impending sell-off of Terasen gas, and the coveting of Alberta's oil sands.

We as responsible Canadians must generate the necessary political will to control our own resources and energy and economic future. The alternative is basically the end of this nation as we know it.

- Charles Leduc, Vancouver BC

Self-defence

Dear Republic:

Have we all lost the ability to actually think? This whole North Korea/Iran/bomb charade shows an incredible lack in our ability to think. Could anyone imagine that North Korea, after developing a bomb, would then, out of the blue, with no provocation, just one day decide to lob this bomb at Seoul, Tokyo, Beijing?

Ya right! And what would be the consequences of this action? The bombed country would just say “sorry” or something? They would not retaliate? What would North Korea gain by starting a conflict other than its own total destruction?

Iran can be looked at in exactly the same light. What both countries have to gain by developing the bomb is their own security. The actions of the US, the former Soviet Union, and China towards invading and occupying whatever country they so desire leads the leadership of countries not wanting to be clients of a superpower to develop deterrents to this aggression.

Sorry for the pun but this is just not rocket science.

- Guy Hawkins, New Delhi

Good and Bad

Dear Republic:

It is always heartening to see a newspaper presenting an alternative to the mainstream media, and your publication seems to be just that. I picked up your September 29 issue and was very impressed with both the level and tone of discussions contained therein.

The article by Michael Nenonen on Tibetan Buddhism was particularly enlightening, and I look forward to critical examinations of other belief systems in forthcoming issues.

My enthusiasm was tempered, however, by a passage in Junius' review of the film The Constant Gardener: "Stay away from pharmaceutical prescriptions. There are natural products that accomplish the same purposes in a healthier way." This is simply not true for the vast majority of pharmaceutical products.

Most "natural" cures have never been properly studied or subjected to the same tests for efficacy and safety that drugs are before they are approved for public consumption. Junius has fallen into the trap of assuming that if pharmaceutical companies are bad, then their products must be equally bad. This is a fallacy and represents dangerous thinking; indeed, just the kind of numbed skepticism that Nenonen decries as so dangerous.

There are certainly problems in the pharmaceutical industry and in the way our society consumes drugs. However, recommending that people turn to "natural" products (what does that mean, anyway?) is simply sloppy thinking.

Thank you once again for your excellent newspaper. Keep up the good work!

- Jonathan D Waller, Vancouver, BC

****