"Dear Bill -

I'm the guy who forwarded the post yesterday concerning high oil prices. As you know, we've discussed this matter, and the implications of peak oil, on previous occasions; I think it's important for your readers to dig beneath the WS optimism regarding energy issues, and to see what worms may actually be crawling beneath those rocks.

The components of this problem are many: there are political issues, geopolitical issues, fiscal and tax issues, supply and demand issues, and indeed purely geological factors that all need to be calculated and discussed. There are many worthwhile sites. Here is a small selection:

http://www.theoildrum.com
http://www.energybulletin.net/
http://www.peakoil.net/

Obviously, the specifics are controversial -- and should be discussed and, if need be, controverted; and just as obviously, one cannot remove politics and geopolitics from the discussion. But that said, I was surprised by the political angst that your discussion unleashed, and wanted to add a couple of points.

We live in interesting times (as the Chinese curse has it), and in order to maneuvre and survive the shoals and rapids that lie in front of us, we have to understand them as they actually are. The prince, says Machiavelli (I paraphrase here; you can add bull and bear in substitution), is neither bold nor diffident simpliciter; rather, he is bold when boldness is required, and diffident when diffidence is called for. He sees reality as it is, without sentiment, without illusion, and he simply rides the waves -- he doesn't try to bully the wind, and he does not cower in the face of placid lakes. And this, of course, means seeing the world for what it is, rationally, objectively, dispassionately.

This is the reason most of us gather at your site -- to trade insights and analysis. Very little is accomplished by giving vent to one's political passions -- even if you think you're 'right' -- because such discussions are inevitably shallow, superficial, resting upon unexamined and unacknowledged premises -- so that even if you've got (or think you've got) Truth 'by the balls', it's like throwing mud and sludge into the water you plan to drink. It does a great disservice to the community we're trying hard to build here.

The rhetoric emerging from Teheran is certainly frightening. But the rhetoric coming out of Washington -- and I speak as a political independent, with no discernible partisan leanings that I can detect -- and the chorus of its supporters in the media, is equally hard for me to fathom. There are profound risks afoot in the world; but current breathless attempts among certain individuals to fan yet another war hysteria (WWIII is already here, says Newt Gingrich?) corresponds to nothing in the objective reality that I can see -- Iran, whatever dangers it may ultimately pose, is not about to bomb Topeka in the next few days, or even years. And there are many disinterested, and fairly well informed and intelligent observers who find the arguments currently being made in Washington to be disingenuous -- to say the least.

But those are my views, and even these are matters that can and should be discussed in rational and measured tones. Ultimately, the greatest danger facing the world today is a certain rabid and rancid irrationalism that is sweeping the globe -- and that is armed to the teeth -- and that I find very frightening. I -- no, we here together -- may not be able to do much to stem the tides of history. But history itself will condemn us nonetheless, if we allow ourselves to get reduced, both as individuals and as a group (like the blinded chorus in an Ancient tragedy), to being merely cheering sections for the catastrophes that may lie before us."

To all, there are two points I'd like to make about my earlier article ("Geopolitics: the power of deception") and the subsequent reader comments:

1. I too believe the UN is corrupt in many ways, but in a civil society, vigilantism is abhorred. It is not up to one nation to impose their Rule of Law and values on any other because they disagree with the aggregate view of all nations any more than say Americans would permit the same behavior in their own country.

I believe the UN is the best place to fix global problems of a political nature. The fact that the institution has never lived up to its potential is not sufficient reason to dismiss it. It is up to economically and militarily powerful nations to clean up the corruption at the UN so that this global dispute-resolution body can be a more effective instrument.

The fact that one or a couple nations can take matters into their own hands is not acceptable to most of the world. That fact is undeniable. On the other hand, the military intervention of any one country on behalf, they say, of the rest of the world, has proven to be an utter failure " not just by Americans, but by Russians, French and British as well.

I will not say more except that geopolitics seems to have overwhelmed people here today. There was no reason for it. It happened that one blogger, who happens to be a psychiatrist, is seeking attention. If he continues, I'll do what the readers advise as to whether he stays or gets banned.

2. There were today a few readers who questioned my deleting some readers comments. The only comments I pulled were a couple from legitimate and long-time commenters who personally attacked one another -- not me or my views -- and I'm not going to permit that stuff on my blog. My readers have told me they don't want it.

And where I pulled a couple, those two commenters wrote me to apologize for their attacks on one another. And they have continued to post valuable comments.

For this blog to function, there has to be a semblance of control, otherwise it simply becomes another of the dregs of the web. I'm not going to allow that. I want readers to comment about issues " pro or con " with me or against me " and I happen to be incredibly tolerant (in my own eyes anyway) " but there are limits.

I'll now give you a slice of my own life as it has been touched by the UN, which admittedly isn't a great deal.

First, I have a younger brother who (I'll put words into his mouth) refers to me as: a right wing capitalist (****). But then, it is my brother who goes to the UN in New York and to global conferences like was held in 2002 in South Africa and gives speeches on behalf of the poor. I respect that, so I don't really mind what he calls me; he's earned the right.

Second, a few years back I happened to be walking through the lobby of the Hyatt-Regency San Francisco Embarcadero while attending the Gold Show; I came across a large group of maybe 40-50 people listening to a single individual. I stopped, listened and asked a question. Although the audience did not approve, the man asked me to carry on a dialogue, which we then did in private at an adjoining lobby bar. The following day, I watched as Sipo Mzimela challenged another speaker in a room full of maybe 2500 people. Later, off-stage he invited me to Atlanta and to South Africa. I chose to go to Atlanta, where I met with his publisher, but ultimately turned down the opportunity of sponsoring his book, "Marching To Slavery". I did, however, agree to support his South African organization in the capacity as senior financial advisor. You see, this man had been the UN lead for his former organization, the ANC (Nelson Mandela) but had later quit along with his associate Prince Buthelezi to join the Inkatha Freedom Party. The man he debated that day in San Francisco in the early 90's was the new head of the UN delegation for the ANC, which later took control of government in South Africa. After the free elections, because of the manner of appointing Ministers, both he and Buthelezi (who I had met a year or two earlier in New Orleans) joined the government as the Minister of Corrections and the Home Affairs Minister respectively. That is about the time I lost contact. Until today.

I always believed in the IFP cause because I believe in helping oppressed people and Inkatha represented some seven or eight million Zulu people who are a tribal minority in their country. But, ultimately, I came to also see the other side of issues, which caused me to stop from going too far in any one direction.

And during the process of this education, I learned how utterly contemptible are the UN delegates who sell their votes on important issues.

I have moderate views on politics; I don't write a political blog; and I have no interest in permitting people to spout their dogma here. I do value your opinions, and hope that you can express them intelligently with respect to issues, without attacking individuals. That's all.

When I bring up an issue that is political, there is always an economic or financial undertone.

As for people like Sipo Mzimela, he'll always be my friend because I understand his values and respect them. He seems not deterred by those in power presently who who would rewrite history. I called him today. He is now back in Atlanta, a clergyman at St. Bart's Church, where I last saw him 15 years ago.

Sipo is writing another book. I wish him well. He has lived an amazing life from being sent as a youth by the African National Congress to Soviet schools to acquire an education, and then to the UN to argue the ANC position, then to lose faith in that and to switch sides. As he says, it has been a somewhat tumultuous life.

He has seen so much in that life that I hope he takes the time to enlighten us here " at least those interested in a civilized discourse -- as to what can go wrong when powerful foreign economic and political interests become involved in local affairs.

I am not a pollyanna. I just happen to believe the world is as small a place as we want to make it. It's up to the people in it " not just governments " to listen to one another, and to work at making it a better place for all. I try to do my share and more.

As owners and managers of capital, I believe we ought to help one another and simultaneously withdraw our support for those who are the trouble-makers, including all those who would deceive us.

With enough people, from all parts of the world, we can build mountains one pebble at a time. We need not care about our skeptics. We need to take the long view on this. Problems of the magnitude we face today will take multi-generations to correct, so it will not be us who solve them. But we can lay the groundwork, or we can stand by or even help make it worse.

There will always be warlords in our midst. That's obvious. My point is that without the right 'worldly' attitude, our global society will go downhill fast.

As for me, I have a date next week for surgery. And this weekend I'll be travelling out of town to celebrate the 60th birthday of a family friend I've known for over 45 years. I'll try to do part of a Week In Review.

But if I don't get around to it you'll understand why, I think.