The Trump administration exhibits fascist tendencies by repressing dissent and targeting internal enemies like climate activists, often in service of fossil fuel interests.
The Guyana-Venezuela conflict is an oil-driven geopolitical crisis, exacerbated by historical U.S. intervention and the competing interests of multinational corporations.
Guyana is trapped in a climate paradox, forced to rely on fossil fuel extraction—the cause of its existential threat from sea level rise—to fund its survival and adaptation.
Legislation created to target specific protests, such as those at Standing Rock, is intentionally designed to be broadly applied later to suppress other forms of dissent across the political spectrum.
Powerful corporate and ideological actors, including specific law firms, fossil fuel companies, and tech billionaires, actively shape U.S. domestic and foreign policy to their own benefit.
1943
Westervelt notes that Venezuela passed the Hydrocarbons Law, requiring foreign oil companies to give half their profits to the state, marking a shift toward resource nationalism.
Pre-1966
She claims the CIA intervened in Guyana's politics to split the People's Progressive Party and install Forbes Burnham as leader before the country's independence.
2007
Westervelt points to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's decree that all oil projects must be majority-owned by the national oil company as a key moment of nationalization.
2015
She identifies the discovery of oil in Guyana as the event that reignited the decades-old border dispute with Venezuela.
2016
Westervelt reports that a fossil fuel trade group proposed model legislation to ALEC to increase penalties for protests near infrastructure, leading to new laws during the Trump administration.
Late 2023
She notes that Venezuela held a referendum on annexing the Essequibo region, escalating the conflict with Guyana and prompting international attention.
▶Fossil-Fueled Geopolitics in South AmericaMay 2026
Westervelt details how the discovery of oil in Guyana has reignited a century-old border dispute with Venezuela, drawing in international powers like the US, UK, and the International Court of Justice. This conflict is framed by a history of foreign corporate control and nationalization of oil assets in the region.
The Guyana-Venezuela flashpoint represents a significant risk for energy investors, where resource nationalism and historical grievances could disrupt major offshore projects and regional stability.
▶The Criminalization of Dissent
Westervelt argues that the U.S. government, particularly under the Trump administration, has systematically worked to suppress dissent by targeting climate activists and civil rights groups. She connects this to the expansion of anti-terror laws post-9/11 and model legislation promoted by fossil fuel industry groups to penalize protests.
Corporations in controversial sectors should monitor the evolving legal landscape, as the increasing use of legislation to quell protests presents both reputational risks and potential legal challenges from civil liberties groups.
▶The Climate ParadoxMay 2026
Westervelt highlights the paradoxical situation in Guyana, a nation facing catastrophic sea level rise that threatens to displace 90% of its population. The government justifies its embrace of large-scale oil extraction as the only way to fund the necessary, massive climate adaptation projects, like relocating its capital.
This 'develop to adapt' strategy creates a volatile feedback loop for investors, where the very industry fueling long-term risk is also the foundation of the nation's short-term economic and climate resilience strategy.
▶Corporate and Ideological Influence on Policy
Westervelt connects specific corporate and ideological actors to U.S. policy. She identifies the influence of Koch Industries and Exxon on trade groups lobbying for anti-protest laws, the Heritage Foundation's role in Project 2025, and Peter Thiel's involvement in attempts to create corporate-controlled 'network states.'
Analysts must look beyond traditional state actors and track the influence of specific corporations, law firms, and ideologically-driven billionaires who are actively shaping domestic and foreign policy to suit their interests.