![]() |
Mist at Dawn - 2022 |
“Everything has already been thought and said: we can at best express it in different forms.” - Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe (1749-1832), German poet, dramatist.
The argument over new North Sea oil and gas licences has become another of those strangely binary debates that now dominate British public life. One is invited to choose between climate responsibility or economic realism, between moral seriousness or jobs and energy security. Yet the truth, as so often, lies in the uncomfortable space between these poles — a space our politics has become increasingly reluctant to inhabit.
Part of the difficulty is that the present moment is not simply the product of policy choices but of accumulated shocks. The 2008 banking crisis hollowed out fiscal confidence; the pandemic exposed the fragility of global supply chains; and the rising urgency of climate change has created a moral pressure that politicians are understandably eager to be seen responding to. Empathy for the climate cause is genuine in many cases, but it is also electorally useful. The result is a political culture that gestures toward long-term transformation while remaining structurally addicted to short-term fixes.
Against this backdrop, the North Sea becomes a kind of mirror in which we see both our aspirations and our failures.
Climate Commitments and the Case Against New Fields
Ed Miliband and others argue that approving new oil and gas fields is incompatible with the UK’s commitment to reach net zero by 2050. Their case is not merely technical but moral: how can a country that claims climate leadership continue to invest in long-lived fossil infrastructure. New fields would operate for decades, potentially locking in emissions and weakening the UK’s credibility in international negotiations.
They also argue that more domestic production will not meaningfully reduce household bills, since oil and gas prices are set globally. Better, they say, to direct investment toward renewables — offshore wind, solar, and the grid infrastructure needed to support them. In this vision, the North Sea becomes a managed sunset industry: existing fields decline gracefully while new exploration is paused.
There is a moral clarity to this position, but perhaps also a certain impatience with the messy realities of transition.
The Counter-Argument: Demand, Security, and the Realities We Prefer Not to Face
Critics respond that the UK will continue to need oil and gas for decades, particularly for aviation, shipping, chemicals, and as backup for intermittent renewables. If domestic production falls faster than demand, the UK will simply import more — often from countries with weaker environmental standards. This is the uncomfortable truth behind the accusation of “outsourcing emissions”.
There is also the human dimension: thousands of jobs, regional economies, and the tax revenues that support public services. For communities in Scotland and the North East, the North Sea is not an abstraction but a livelihood.
Economists add another layer: the effect of restricting supply depends on the speed of global demand decline. If demand collapses quickly, new fields risk becoming stranded assets. If demand declines slowly, restricting domestic production merely shifts extraction abroad without reducing global emissions — the phenomenon known as carbon leakage.
Here again, the debate resists simple moral sorting.
The British Paradox: Producing Oil While Importing It
The UK’s position is further complicated by a structural paradox. We produce high-quality North Sea crude, yet we import large volumes of oil and refined fuels. This is partly because:
• UK refineries are specialised and cannot efficiently process all domestic crude
• Some crude is exported for refining abroad while different grades are imported
• The UK’s refining capacity has declined over decades
This means that even if the UK increases production, the direct domestic benefit is limited. We remain tied to global markets, with all their volatility and geopolitical risk.
The Long Shadow of Thatcher and the Lost Opportunity
No discussion of the North Sea can avoid the historical comparison with Norway. The UK’s oil boom in the 1970s and 1980s provided a fiscal windfall that was largely spent rather than saved. Margaret Thatcher used the revenues to fund tax cuts, public spending, and the restructuring of the economy. Norway, by contrast, created a sovereign wealth fund that now exceeds a trillion dollars.
It is tempting to moralise this contrast, but the deeper lesson is about long-term imagination — or the lack of it. Britain consumed its inheritance; Norway invested it. Today, as the North Sea declines, we face the consequences of that choice.
Toward a Synthesis: Beyond the Binary
The present debate is framed as a choice between climate virtue and economic necessity, but this framing is itself a symptom of our political short-termism. The real challenge is to hold multiple truths at once:
• The UK must decarbonise rapidly
• The UK will still need oil and gas for some time
• Domestic production has limited but real benefits
• New fields risk undermining climate credibility
• Abrupt withdrawal risks economic and social harm
The question is not whether to choose one side or the other, but how to design a transition that is morally serious, economically realistic, and historically aware.
This requires something British politics has struggled to cultivate: a capacity for long-term planning that survives electoral cycles and resists the temptation of symbolic gestures. The shocks of the past two decades — financial, epidemiological, environmental — have made this harder, but also more necessary.
If there is hope for a synthesis, it lies in recovering that lost habit of thinking beyond the next headline.
Here are some thoughts around Ezra Pound and Confucianism, focussing on parallels between Confucian order and Pound’s attraction to political control. It seems to me in our current times, the desire for order in the Western democracies - highlighted today by the speech by Marco Rubio at the Munich Security Conference - was echoed in Ezra Pound's thought processes, especially in the 1930s and 1940s.
Meantime China is these days reviving Confucianism’s values where they align with its overarching political agenda. This, after the Maoist-era rejection of those values. And so with China beginning to lead the world in manufacturing output , a controlled programme towards Net Zero by the 2060s ( a realistic target), and a controlled autocratic politics informed in part by Confucian ideals , Ezra Pound’s vision offers an interesting and fertile landscape for debate about authority, culture, and the search for social coherence.
Poetry as a Blueprint for Civilisation
The poetry of Ezra Pound cannot be separated from his
lifelong engagement with the ethical and political thought of Confucius. As the
diagram on this page suggests, Pound’s ambition was not simply aesthetic but
civilisational: he believed poetry could help restore moral clarity and social
order. Nowhere is this clearer than in the poems themselves, especially in
sections of The Cantos where Confucian ideas of governance, language, and
historical example shape both the structure and purpose of the verse.
Ezra Pound, Confucian Order, and the Politics of
Discipline
Pound did not read Confucius merely as an ancient sage; he treated
him as a diagnostician of civilisational health. In Confucian philosophy, Pound
believed he had found a framework for restoring moral clarity, linguistic
precision, and hierarchical harmony to societies he saw as collapsing into
financial abstraction and political incoherence.
Pound’s Discovery of Confucius as a Civilisational Guide
Central to Pound’s interpretation was the Confucian
insistence that order begins with correct relationships: ruler and
subject, parent and child, word and meaning. Social harmony, in this view, is
not achieved through democratic contestation but through moral authority,
ritual continuity, and disciplined hierarchy. Pound perceived modern Western
democracies as having lost precisely this coherence. Parliamentary politics,
mass finance, and ideological propaganda appeared to him as symptoms of a
civilisation that had abandoned moral structure for procedural mechanism.
Confucian Order versus Modern Democratic Disorder
This intellectual longing for order helps explain Pound’s attraction to authoritarian models of governance, including his support for Benito Mussolini. Pound imagined fascism not primarily as a doctrine of repression but as a vehicle for no restoring the ethical clarity he associated with Confucian governance. He believed strong leadership might realign language, economy, and culture with moral purpose. In this sense, Pound’s fascism was less an embrace of totalitarianism as such than an attempt—misguided and historically catastrophic—to translate Confucian ideals of hierarchy and virtue into modern European politics.
From Confucian Ethics to Authoritarian Politics
The flaw in Pound’s reasoning lies in a crucial difference
between Confucian and fascist concepts of authority. Confucian political
philosophy binds rulers to moral responsibility: legitimacy depends on virtue,
and unjust rulers lose the Mandate of Heaven. Fascism, by contrast, tends to
ground legitimacy in power, myth, and national destiny. Pound collapsed this
distinction, projecting Confucian ethical restraint onto regimes that did not
in fact embody it.
![]() |
| [Tap/Click to View ] |
Enduring Questions About Order in Modern Societies
Yet the questions that animated Pound have not disappeared.
Contemporary Western politics still wrestles with anxieties about disorder,
economic opacity, and cultural fragmentation. Calls for renewed discipline and
strategic coherence continue to surface in public discourse, such as in recent
remarks by Marco Rubio at the Munich Security Conference, where concerns about
geopolitical instability and institutional weakness were foregrounded. These
anxieties echo, in a different register: Pound’s fear that liberal societies
risk losing the capacity to sustain order.
Meanwhile, the global rise of China—with its combination of
centralised political authority, long-term industrial planning, and civilisational
self-consciousness—has renewed interest in alternative models of governance and
social coordination. Some observers see in China’s trajectory a modern echo,
however imperfect, of the Confucian belief that social stability flows from
disciplined leadership and coherent cultural narratives.
Pound’s Legacy: A Warning
For this reason, Pound’s thought remains provocative. His
political judgments were deeply compromised, and his antisemitism and wartime
actions rightly condemn him morally. Yet the underlying tension he
articulated—the struggle between procedural freedom and civilisational
order—continues to animate debates about democracy, governance, and cultural
continuity.
Pound’s Confucianism therefore survives not as a political
prescription but as an intellectual focal point. It reminds us that modern
societies still wrestle with an ancient question: whether stability arises
primarily from liberty, or from moral structure and hierarchy. Pound’s tragic
error was to believe the latter could be imposed by authoritarian power.
His enduring relevance lies in forcing us to confront the dilemma itself.
Poems Showing Confucian Influence in Pound: Poetry as
Moral Instruction
The engagement of Ezra Pound with the thought of Confucius
appears most clearly in the poems where he treats poetry as a vehicle for moral
and civilisational instruction rather than personal expression. In these works,
Pound draws on Confucian ideas of ethical hierarchy, historical exemplars, and
the shaping power of language.
Confucius Speaks in The Cantos
History as Moral Example: The China Cantos
Confucian influence also shapes the so-called China Cantos (LII–LXI), where Pound
recounts episodes from Chinese history. These passages present rulers as moral
exemplars whose success or failure depends on their ability to sustain ritual,
justice, and social harmony. History becomes, in Pound’s Confucian mode, a
series of lessons in governance rather than a chronicle of events.
![]() |
| [Tap/Click to view] |
Early Signals of Order: Cathay and the Idea of
Civilisation
An earlier, more indirect influence can be seen in Cathay [ Links to audio on YouTube]
[ Link to
Project Gutenberg for the full set ] . Although based largely on classical
Chinese poems rather than explicitly Confucian texts, the collection introduces
Pound’s admiration for a civilisation he perceived as ordered, ceremonious, and
ethically grounded. The clarity of imagery and restraint of tone in these poems
foreshadow his later belief that poetic language should function with the
precision Confucius demanded of political speech.
![]() |
| [Tap/Click to view] |
Taken together, these works show Pound using poetry not merely to describe the world but to model a civilisation. Through Confucius, he imagined verse as a tool of cultural memory, moral instruction, and social order — an ambition that lies at the heart of his lifelong poetic project.
Further Reading:
Ezra Pound, The Cantos (London: Faber and Faber, various
editions)
A.J.Moody, Ezra Pound: Poet: Volume II, The Epic Years (Oxford
University Press 2018)
Confucius, The Analects, trans. by D. C. Lau (Internet Archive)
Confucius, The Great Learning, in The Four Books, trans. by James
Legge (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1893)
Ezra Pound, Confucian Analects (London: Peter Owen, 1951)
Ezra Pound, The Great Digest and Unwobbling Pivot (New York: New
Directions, 1954)
Ernest Fenollosa, The Chinese Written Character as a Medium for Poetry,
ed. by Ezra Pound (San Francisco: City Lights, 1936)
Demetres Tryphonopoulos, Ezra Pound and Confucianism (Montreal:
McGill–Queen’s University Press, 1992)
Ronald Bush, The Genesis of Ezra Pound's Cantos (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1976)