World Peace Through Capitalism?

Got a show idea? Post them here!

Moderators: Loki, exposno1, Parrot, Quasigriz, NickDupree, nmoore63, robroydude, Spinny Spamkiller

World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby godslabrat » Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:10 pm

It's been suggested that the best way to world peace is through globalization and free market trade. The theory being, if each country depends on another, the desire for war would be negated because any conflict could potentially endanger your economy, as well as the economies of your allies. In an episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit, they made this argument, and further said that it was unlikely to work, however, it was the only plan that stood any chance at all of working.

Since we love to discuss war and free trade so much, could one be used to cancel out the other?
User avatar
godslabrat
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:30 pm

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Waleis » Wed Feb 01, 2012 4:13 pm

Symmetrical warfare is unlikely in a globalist world (where every nation is connected, that is)...but asymmetric warfare will become more effective, dangerous, and ubiquitous. This is a trend we are witnessing already.

Global capitalism won't erase war, it will only transform it.
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9784
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby wise_owl » Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:52 pm

The simplest answer is this; Wars were fought before there were countries, and they will/would be fought afterwards. Linking people by economics isn't a way to ensure there won't be war or violence. I think in fact, having seen that particular episode of Bull$hit, that Penn and Tellar make a very poor argument. People who are in business together murder each other all the time. Money is an amazing motivator toward violence and people will kill each other over a used car dealership, or a 1000$ deal gone bad. Put that to the global scale and it merely means, as has been observed, that War would just transform and focus itself elsewise.
User avatar
wise_owl
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:30 pm

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Smitty-48 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:01 pm

Waleis wrote:Symmetrical warfare is unlikely in a globalist world (where every nation is connected, that is)...but asymmetric warfare will become more effective, dangerous, and ubiquitous. This is a trend we are witnessing already.



Don't write symmetrical warfare off yet. Could make a cameo at any moment really. Nobody gets along. Everybody is armed to the teeth. Everybody is corrupt and incompetent. Detente never lasts.
Nec Aspera Terrent
User avatar
Smitty-48
Archon
 
Posts: 21046
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Waleis » Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:00 pm

If the major powers engage in a direct conflict, the carnage would be on par with the Thirty Years War. It would be game-changing, a la Peace of Westphalia. There's really no knowing (as far as I'm concerned) with what happens after that.
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9784
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Smitty-48 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:11 pm

Waleis wrote:If the major powers engage in a direct conflict, the carnage would be on par with the Thirty Years War. It would be game-changing, a la Peace of Westphalia. There's really no knowing (as far as I'm concerned) with what happens after that.


Depends on whether you beleive in limited war, or not. There has long been a debate on how a conflict would play out, and whether it would actually be a total war, or whether the major powers would restrain themselves, to limit escalation.

For example, Britain and France went to war with Russia in 1854, to defend Turkey and it wasn't a total war, but when Britain and France went to war with Germany in 1914, it was. It may depend on what they are fighting over, why and where.

There have been limited wars between great powers and there have also been major wars that were peer on proxy, or proxy on proxy, as well.
Nec Aspera Terrent
User avatar
Smitty-48
Archon
 
Posts: 21046
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Taliesin » Wed Feb 01, 2012 8:04 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:
Depends on whether you beleive in limited war, or not. There has long been a debate on how a conflict would play out, and whether it would actually be a total war, or whether the major powers would restrain themselves, to limit escalation.

For example, Britain and France went to war with Russia in 1854, to defend Turkey and it wasn't a total war, but when Britain and France went to war with Germany in 1914, it was. It may depend on what they are fighting over, why and where.

There have been limited wars between great powers and there have also been major wars that were peer on proxy, or proxy on proxy, as well.


+1, assuming we still have statesmen who know what realpolitik is. Sheeit, we might wind up missing that asshole Kissinger after all.
"Come back clowny-shoes and argue with me some more!"
-DBTrek
Taliesin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 667
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:19 pm

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Smitty-48 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:18 am

The fact is, the current great power "peace" is not really a peace, because the great powers are still highly adversarial, but it is actually a technological stalemate that is restricting them, not an actual peace. As we have seen with the digital age, technology is unstable. If the "peace" is based on a stable technological paradigm, then I would say that the "peace" is actually highly unstable. The Arms industry, on all sides, being a entrenched interest, has never operated as if there is a peace, but has continued to innovate, and it has begun to achieve some ominous success in areas which are specifically related to the technological stalemate, which is at the heart of the current peer to peer stability.

Arms races are instigating factors in of themselves and armed and (often needlessly) aggressive countries, which exaggerate threats, have a tendency to create self fulfilling prophecies, by creating a threat where there was none, by preparing for it preemptively.

It's important to understand that war and geopolitics are not based on rationality.

When you think that way, I feel like you become as Alan Greenspan, with his "enlightened self interest" mantra, in regards to the markets regulating themselves.

The military industrial congressional complex is out of control, and rather than demobilizing from the Cold War, has actually expanded in its wake, and like the WOPR in Wargames, is still preparing for WWIII, even after the original programmers have given it instructions to think about something else. To wit; WWIII as entrenched interest.

WOPR sees insurgency, non state actors and low intensity warfare as an inconvenient distraction, that it is forced to play along with, in order to protect the imperatives of its core mission, which is and has always been, preparing to fight WWIII.
Nec Aspera Terrent
User avatar
Smitty-48
Archon
 
Posts: 21046
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:37 am

Capitalism IS an arms race punctuated by wars.

If a person is actually persuaded by those two comedians, then there is not much anybody can do for that person. Those two guys, while sometimes having an interesting and entertaining show, often use the most fallacious arguments. Then they purposefully tweak the "other side" to sound like idiots in some self-aggrandizing attempt to make a point. Even when I generally agree with the side they take on something, I just end up shaking my head at this ridiculousness of how those guys distort the other argument.
Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. - G.K.C.
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37344
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Smitty-48 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:05 am

My assertion is that the Second Cold War actually began with the US withdrawal from the ABM treaty, in order to protect and pursue Ballistic Missile Defense. BMD doesn't have to work perfectly, to destabilize the strategic status quo. It is however, becoming more viable, and expanding, all the time. I can't see how it is not inherently destabilizing. It would seem to be the dictionary definition of.

I mean, a Canadian naval intelligence officer, working at one of the most sensitive facilities in "Five Eyes", HMCS Trinity in Halifax, was just arrested on charges of espionage. The accusation is that he was working for the Russian FSB. Based on where he worked, the Russians definitely seem to be going back to the old school here. Looking for an edge up, and going right into the proverbial cookie jar to get it, even if they get caught with their hands in there. If true, It was aggressive targeting, to be sure. A clear and unequivocally adversarial operation. Canada is obviously not the primary target here, but simply the gateway into the network.

Now, I'm sure everybody is spying on everybody, all the time, but none the less, this kind of spying is for a specific type of intel and it is intel to prepare for possible confrontation and even warfighting. This isn't industrial espionage to steal Apple's new operating system we're talking about.
Last edited by Smitty-48 on Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nec Aspera Terrent
User avatar
Smitty-48
Archon
 
Posts: 21046
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:32 am

I think breaking the ABM treaty was one of the worst things we could have done. Now with New START probably not going to happen, we definitely find ourselves in a new cold war. We have extremely war mongering presidents as well. Obama is even more violent than Bush who was more violent than Clinton. It just keeps getting worse.

But capitalism drives these things. In 2000, we didn't need ABM shields. It was business, plain and simple. This is what capitalism does. Capitalism is war throughout. From the local business owners fighting out market share in a small town to nations fighting over access to resources and national markets. Capitalism IS war. It is the application of warfare in economics. This is why so many people get ruined by it. It is intrinsically a war on the workers. On the peasants in developing nations. On governments themselves. It is an almost inexorable force corrupting and bribing its way to ever more power and influence. Though only a small number of people sit at the top of the pyramid, none of them really control it. They each will wipe out the others if given the chance.

This entire global scheme of capitalism and globalism is an enormous evil. In the future, people will look back at our time, before the collapse, and scratch their heads at how stupidly obstinate we are. How we knowingly march our world into disaster without changing course, simply because everybody looks out for numero uno, and nobody wants to sacrifice for others. Vices have been propped up as virtues like a golden calf. Pretty soon, we too are going to get handed our sentence to wander around in the proverbial desert.

Peace? This is no peace. This is war. When there is no war abroad, they wage war on the American people. But it never stops. It's Mammon.
Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. - G.K.C.
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37344
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Mr_Noyes » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:50 am

Dr. Strangelove wrote:This entire global scheme of capitalism and globalism is an enormous evil. In the future, people will look back at our time, before the collapse, and scratch their heads at how stupidly obstinate we are. How we knowingly march our world into disaster without changing course, simply because everybody looks out for numero uno, and nobody wants to sacrifice for others. Vices have been propped up as virtues like a golden calf. Pretty soon, we too are going to get handed our sentence to wander around in the proverbial desert.


I question your notion that in case of a collapse humanity will learn anything from it. Take a look at European history from 1000 to 1944 AD - the sheer amount of one large war after the other is simply staggering.
Mr_Noyes
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:58 am

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Smitty-48 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:51 am

Well, BMD actually goes way back, but the technology never worked, so it was dangerous, but not really immediately destabilizing. The technology is now starting to catch up and it is catching up fast.

The whole point of the ABM treaty was not so much; "this is an imminent threat", as much as it was "maybe we don't want to go down this path", because even for warhawks, that path was looking pretty damn scary.

It was the same thing with intermediate nuclear forces in Europe and the INF treaty. "Backing away from the edge".

Now we have ever more viable BMD being deployed rapidly, as well as intermediate nuclear forces which are the new improved versions, back in the mix, just like that... and it's not even being done with eyes wide open, but rather we are sleepwalking.
Last edited by Smitty-48 on Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nec Aspera Terrent
User avatar
Smitty-48
Archon
 
Posts: 21046
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:56 am

I think nations like Iran make the case for a need to implement internationally run BMD systems. That could have been implemented *with* Russia's help, which might have given a pretty good lead time on rolling the technology out. But instead, it was billed as an aggressive move against Moscow when they were down. Now we are down and they are going to make us pay for that.


I think it would be advisable to maintain overlapping BMD systems in Europe, SW Asia, and Central Asia. Let NATO run one. Let Americans and Russians maintain another, protecting nations from random missiles launched out of SW and Central Asia. That would have been more reasonable. But the Bush-style diplomacy was atrocious.
Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. - G.K.C.
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37344
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: World Peace Through Capitalism?

Postby Smitty-48 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:02 am

Dr. Strangelove wrote:I think nations like Iran make the case for a need to implement internationally run BMD systems. That could have been implemented *with* Russia's help, which might have given a pretty good lead time on rolling the technology out. But instead, it was billed as an aggressive move against Moscow when they were down. Now we are down and they are going to make us pay for that.



There's no way the Russians would see it as anything other than a threat to their deterrent. Because it is one.

In fact, the US stating that it is about Iran, when that is actually irrelevant, comes off as being hostile in of itself.

Doesn't matter if it is for Timbuktu, its existence and expansion is a direct and growing challenge to their deterrent, especially when projected forward a few years, and it has already precipitated an arms race, as they are completely upgrading their nuclear forces and their conventional forces and pursuing their own missile defense in response.

If that's not the Cold War, what is? That arms race was the essence of the Cold War. It wasn't economic theory. Even if it is nascent at this point, the trend lines certainly look like a collision course. How much missile defense is too much, in a world stabilized by a missile stalemate? Not much.

The CW was never really about economics, that was a bi-product. It was about Russia refusing to kneel before a hegemon. They really didn't think that they were being told to kneel in 1990, and they wouldn't have, if they had thought that was the agenda, but USANATO has behaved as if that was the deal ever since.

And is that wasn't enough, bear in mind that in the interim, we have created the completely new battlespace of Cyberwar, which is already causing massive destabilization and dislocation, not in the virtual world, but in the real.
Nec Aspera Terrent
User avatar
Smitty-48
Archon
 
Posts: 21046
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:23 am


Return to New Common Sense Show Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest