The term ‘petrocapitalism’ emerges as a theoretical framework in the geopolitical discussions in the early 2000s. It was at first tied with a way of understanding power-relations and environmental degradation wrapped up in petroleum extraction or production. Initially petrocapitalism was used in accumulation geography conversations that were centred around the idea of profitable oil extraction in the relatively few spots on the Earth. This view, also referred to as Extractive Petrocapitalism, took into consideration the link between violence, money, and power, which led to an emergence of ideas that linked oil with some of the foundational values of capitalist liberalism such as democracy and freedom.

The discussion of the concept attempts to make connections between capitalism and oil consumption questioning the complex web or relations between corporations, states, and communities, especially as the latter bear with the damaging consequences of oil extraction without seeing its wealth. As this view questions oil consumption in the live of an average person, or their “oil addiction.” Huber, in his essay Petrocapitalism, argues that “Ultimately, if we insist on coupling oil with the mode of production “capitalism,” it must be self-evident that efforts to move beyond oil might require moving beyond capitalism itself – specifically its requirements for growth and accumulation over questions of social and environmental benefit. Thus, a move beyond petrocapitalism needs to be less understood as a struggle over “technology” and more a struggle over the political and economic organization of society as a whole.”

This provocation for a paradigms shift in our social organizations, patterns of consumption, and overall reliance in oil poses questions on degrowth and reduction of our carbon footprint. How can we make art institutions, curators, artists and the public transform their engagement with art so that it divests from oil and becomes more resourceful?