The roots of anti-energy madness

By Donald Hank

The Madwoman: What are they looking for? Did they lose something?

Pierre: They're looking for oil.

The Madwoman: Strange! What do they want to make with it?

Pierre: The things people make with oil. Misery. War. Ugliness. A miserable world.

These lines are the most frequently quoted by literature critics writing about the famous play "La folle de Chaillot" (The Madwoman of Chaillot), written by Jean Giraudoux in 1944. Since the late 40s the play has been a constant favorite throughout Europe and on college campuses in the US. For example, an early reference to a US production of the play goes back to 1958 (at MIT). In 1969, an English-language adaptation was made into a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. till going strong, it was staged, for example, at Knox College last year and at the Ojai Community Theater in Ventura County, CA, just this year.

In the play, the Madwoman (Countess Aurelia) and her friends, all street people, discover that a group of rich investors have discovered oil under the streets of Paris and have contrived to lay claim to it without the knowledge or consent of the Parisians. In the end, Aurelia and her co-conspirators trick the investors to enter her home as a kind of promotional event. The investors are then permanently barricaded inside and hence prevented from doing further harm.

The above lines from the play best reflect the Left's visceral reaction to the oil industry and the attitudes behind their energy hatred.

Proof that the play is still prized as an anti-oil propaganda piece, and not merely as ars gratia artis (art for its own sake), is a review of the above-mentioned recent staging appearing in the Ventura County Star under the title line "Madwoman uses wit to skewer the rich," in which we read:

Venture capitalists trample over the poor.

Oil fuels war. Greed is good.

Snatched from today's headlines? Well, maybe, but those themes are also central to "The Madwoman of Chaillot," Jean Giraudoux's fanciful satire written in 1944 while his beloved France was under Nazi occupation, then staged a year later after his death at age 62. Giraudoux wrote many colorful and witty works, but "Madwoman" stands out for its wisdom and timeliness, then and now.

Accordingly, for the Left, oil and the greedy oil tycoons are synonymous with misery, war and ugliness, while the energy-hating Left is portrayed as wise and ever timely. Further, the above-cited trite lines, which we are never allowed to forget, and are touted as "wit," enshrine the idea of oil as an evil tool in the hands of the rich. It is in large part this irrational perception on the part of madmen, as fancifully reflected by a Parisian playwright in the last century, that today prompts the Left in Congress to reject drilling for oil, building refineries, or making travel affordable in America and elsewhere. As usual, it is the rich snobs of far-left academe and Hollywood who support an idea that ultimately deprives the poor and middle class of a decent standard of living, all the while hypocritically blaming other rich people — those who earn their wealth on the free market — for somehow causing their misery. For them, Giraudoux's play is a kind of religious canon and as such obviates any further rationale for the ideas it represents. Lucky for them.

Like the Madwoman of Chaillot, today's Left in Congress, while fueling one economic crisis after another, manage to cast themselves in the role of saviors while making the capitalists who supply us with ever scarcer but desperately needed energy look like villains. A perfect example is the call for greater windfall profit taxes on oil companies.

But are the battle lines for vs against affordable energy really so clearly marked out that we can unequivocally blame the Left for the mess we're in?

A recent article by Paul Weyrich leaves little doubt that they are. Quoting figures submitted by Representative Roy Blunt, Weyrich shows, for example, that:

"... for the past 14 years, 91% of House Republicans voted to develop oil at ANWR while 86% of Democrats opposed drilling there..."

Other categories from Weyrich's article:

Coal liquefaction: 78% of Democrats opposed vs 97% of Republicans in favor.

Oil exploration of Outer Continental Shelf: 81% of House Republicans "yes," 83% of House Democrats "no."

Increased refinery capacity: 97% of House Republicans "yes," 96% of House Democrats "no."

Development of oil and gas reserves: 91% of Republicans "yes," 86% of Democrats "no."

By refusing to allow oil drilling in ANWR and off-shore, shale oil exploitation, or construction of nuclear power plants or new refineries, and through various efforts to tax energy, such as proposals to slap "carbon footprint" taxes on frequent flyers and big-car owners, or by intricate schemes of enforced purchase of carbon credits, the Left, in tandem with OPEC, has managed to impoverish the entire world within about the space of a year, severely reducing the size of the middle class everywhere. To add insult to injury, the greens' insistence on converting corn, sugar cane and other staple crops into fuel (as though the burning of ethanol did not produce CO2!) has helped create a worldwide crisis in food prices.

None of these untoward side effects of their snake oil remedies faze the Left, who continue to steadfastly blame economic woes on the free-market suppliers of goods rather than on manipulators in government who throttle the trade in those goods by enacting a maze of often contradictory regulations, blocking exploitation of energy sources and imposing new tax burdens on already-dear energy.

As for "The Madwoman of Chaillot," if an acquaintance should happen to enthusiastically mention having seen this play somewhere, be sure to ask:

Did you ride to the theater on your bike or did you walk?

© Donald Hank