I'm pretty sure a bunch of old realms having long time land disputes and family feuds and ethnic disavowals for over a thousand years is different from an industrial military complex that keeps conjuring up wars for oil and to keep itself well-oiled, and worse yet stirs its fat finger in the world's cup in the name of self-righteous capitalism.
As opposed to the amazing world where the nation with the ability to field the biggest and best conventional force is the hegemon. I'm struggling to see the ethical difference.
A society that doesn't loathe itself and goes to war to murder other people is healthier than a society that loathes itself and still goes to war to murder other people.
Neither is ideal, but one results in one place being shitty and one being okay, the other makes two places shitty to live in.
As far as I'm concerned, international politics / geopolitics is appallingly Melian and I wish it were some other way but I think it's just the sociopathic shitshow we're stuck with.
That's a bit naive. If you look at World War 1, you see a series of decentralized conflicts and power struggles that snowballed into a global conflict killing millions.
There has existed a multipolar world in the past, in Europe. That world was very frequently in a state of overt war, so it's not clear that that's a better state of affairs than an unchallenged dominant nation.
I look at it differently (and I admit I could be wrong). I don't view these conglomerates as weapons but rather as baggage holding us back. I think by freeing ourselves from them we'll have a better chance at dominating competing nations. While they do have a lot of resources, it's not often good comes from it. They stifle innovation and lack imagination.
I don't think along those lines. I don't see state A and their military on one side, and state B with their military on the other, and war profiteers somewhere else -- I see state A and B, their militaries and all war profiteers on one side, and civilians, the people who both get to die and pay for the stuff, on the other. E.g. the elites in China and the US have more in common with each other than with the populations they screw over, and those populations have more in common with each other than with their own so-called leaders.
Also, if a military is only useful to defend against other militaries, and that is the actual reason it exists, how did the first military organization come into existence? They had nothing to defend against, so maybe they just made something up? Oh look, the moon is so very round today, we need to attack the neighbouring tribe before they kill us all... I think it's perfectly possible that war has always been a racket, and that Stockholm Syndrome and nothing else keeps it going.
Isn't this just the 'democracies don't fight wars' conjecture of International Relations extended to corporate entities? It seems like a hubristic assertion of business over demographic interests that will look increasingly quaint in the future, much like the power fantasies about the East India Company do now.
Fair point. I guess the difference is the lack of strategic alliances throughout the history with anyone in the area. There were tactical alliances, even with Iran somewhat recently (Operation Opera), but nothing long lasting and "solid". In other words, the environment has always been pretty hostile.
For the same reason, but the opposite direction? Does Kuwait (in this example) have an identity strong enough that it out lasts its oil reserves, or does it faction back out among its neighbors as migrant workers disburse "home" (or the next richest country or what have you)?
Might not require wars to be fought, but might still mean borders get redrawn in the gulf region when the economics shift.
...And an abundance of strong governments who are willing to fund various factions to kill other various factions to fight a proxy war over natural resources.
I don't think independence wars are on the same category. They are much more likely to be beneficial, and having a well defined enemy, much less likely to grow unbounded.
Is that really suprising ? All the world powers are preocuppied with wars ( both hot and economic) , neocolonialism , and keeping the inssanely broken and injust finnacial system from collapisng.
Enviromment and the ecosystems are like ecomosists like to says externlaities.
reply