Academic

THE ECONOMIST GOES AFTER ?VLADIMIR OBAMA:? For several reasons. The vitriol has a xenophobic edge?

By Glenn Reynolds

THE ECONOMIST GOES AFTER “VLADIMIR OBAMA:”

For several reasons. The vitriol has a xenophobic edge: witness the venomous references to ?British Petroleum?, a name BP dropped in 1998 (just as well that it dispensed with the name Anglo-Iranian Oil Company even longer ago). Vilifying BP also gets in the way of identifying other culprits, one of which is the government. BP operates in one of the most regulated industries on earth with some of the most perverse rules, subsidies and incentives. Shoddy oversight clearly contributed to the spill, and an energy policy which reduced the demand for oil would do more to avert future environmental horrors than fierce retribution.

Mr Obama is not the socialist the right claims he is (see article). He went out of his way, meeting BP executives on June 16th, to insist that he has no interest in undermining the company?s financial stability. But his reaction is cementing business leaders? impression that he is indifferent to their concerns. If he sees any impropriety in politicians ordering executives about, upstaging the courts and threatening confiscation, he has not said so. The collapse in BP?s share price suggests that he has convinced the markets that he is an American version of Vladimir Putin, willing to harry firms into doing his bidding.

Nobody should underestimate the scale of BP?s mistake, nor the damage that it has caused. But if the president does not stand up for due process, he will frighten investors across the board. The damage to America?s environment is bad enough. The president risks damaging its economy too.

Ouch. The Brits are not happy. Read the whole thing.

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on June 18, 2010 (boomark / email).