To Frack Or Not To Frack, That Is The Question. Fracking and the Hegelian Dialectic.

Fracking – what is it?

Here is a site online describing it, http://www.energyfromshale.org/hydraulic-fracturing/how-hydraulic-fracturing-works  

Fracking – the new technology of fracturing rock formations deep below the ground by vibration; pumping through them, at enormously high pressure, millions of gallons of water mixed with lubricating chemicals.  This process releases gas from billions of tiny pockets in these rock layers which is gathered up and used for fuel. 

Look at these excerpts from 2 articles from the BBC.  They cover the subject of fracking.  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23373618

“Water UK, which represents all major UK water suppliers, said the shale gas extraction method posed a threat if not ‘carefully planned and carried out’….”
“..Current EU and UK regulations "should ensure" no such incidents take place, Mr Dutton said - but he said the government "wants to speed up the process" and warned that loosening environmental controls, as happened in the US, would increase the risks…”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23368505

“The government has outlined plans to give tax breaks to companies involved in the UK's nascent shale gas industry.

The plans would make the UK the "most generous" regime for shale gas in the world, the government said.
But they have been criticised by environmentalists, with Friends of the Earth calling them a "disgrace".
Greenpeace added that communities affected by fracking - the technique for extracting shale gas - faced a lot of disruption for very little gain….”

Here is another article on the subject of fracking from Sky:-

“Fracking Water Warning As Tax Break Announced”

“As the Chancellor unveils plans to slash the tax paid on some gas fracking income, water firms issue a warning over contamination.”

 http://news.sky.com/story/1117721/fracking-water-warning-as-tax-break-announced

So what we have here is an example of how the Hegelian Dialectic is used by Government and its corporate colleagues to manipulate the fracking situation in its presentation to us.

The Government are in cahoots with the big baddies in the fracking business, giving huge tax breaks to these environmental vandals. 

Environmental groups are the goodies, incensed by this (apparently) and want this dangerous practice scaled down or stopped altogether.   Water firms are also worried about safety and pollution and whatnot!

Oh dear! What can be done?  How can this be solved?

These are the 2 sides of the dialectic, in relation to fracking, and together create the dilemma. 

The Government is contributing up the THESIS, which is:-

1)   Let There Be Fracking    all over the UK, a mad, fracking jamboree - paid for with public money in the form of tax breaks (which means we all pay!)  A FRACKING GOLD RUSH!  We must have power, we must have energy – at any cost! Go get it!

The water companies and the environmental groups are now setting up the ANTITHESIS, which is:-   

 2)  Let There Be NO Fracking, anywhere in the UK.  We must not have this dangerous, risky, nasty energy – ever!  Those who want this energy are environmental vandals getting rich, with no thought to the consequences.  Stop this now!  Protest!

  

BOTH GROUPS ARE BEING MANIPULATED FROM BEHIND THE SCENES IN THIS LITTLE PLAY-ACTING SCENARIO.  A DILEMMA IS CREATED, ‘TO FRACK OR NOT TO FRACK, THAT IS THE QUESTION.’

3)   The SYNTHESIS, in relation to this subject of fracking, is that THERE SHALL BE SOME FRACKING. Moderate fracking, safe fracking, you know – the kind of fracking that cares for the birds and bees and little children and drinking water and fresh air! Dilemma solved!

In 3), The balance between the anti and the pro fracking sides is the perceived  “moderate” compromise between going fracking mad, or banning it forever. 

However, the compromise (3) is actually exactly what the pro fracking Elite wanted all along.  A little play is being enacted here, by putting 1) and 2) before us in order to demoralise and confuse us, in order that we accept 3) so it becomes accepted as solving ‘the dilemma’ and becomes viewed as “fact” that:-  “Hmmm, yes, fracking eh?”  fracking is “moderately ok, I suppose,” “ what can you do?” “I don’t know!” “Perhaps we should frack after all?” “well, on the one hand… but on the other…” etc. etc. etc.       What’s on telly? What’s for dinner?  What’s the time?