Question for CEOs: Can Capitalism Survive Sans War?

Question for All CEOs: Can Capitalism Survive Sans War?

“The manufacture of dynamite increased from 11 tons in 1867, the year Nobel first put it on the market, to 66,500 tons in 1897…

To arm and equip mass armies required the efforts of mass industry and the munitions companies gathered under their control raw materials, mines, foundries and transportation. Markets and profits were almost limitless and they responded with fierce vigor to the incentive.” Patriotism in every country in Europe was at a fever pitch.

The “War to End All Wars” began in August 1914.

The 31 year war lasted from 1914 to 1945. After that ‘wonderful age for capitalism’ there was fear that peace might become infectious. Fortunately such was not the case.

Quotes from “The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the world before the War: 1890-1914”.

life itself is war

-Imp

Hi Coberst,

It would depend on your definition of war. I would argue that the real wars with the most casualties are being maimed by economics and less so with explosives… The .50 cal bullet is being replaced by Bic lighters.

I don’t mean to make light of those casualties of the traditional killing weapons. But over time, the losers in a “war” are the countries with the highest trade deficits.

My OP is somewhat an attempt at irony I guess. This kind of post should be placed in a politics forum maybe; the problem for me is that I want a discussion of this matter that is rational rather than emotional. One can get only emotional partisanship in the other category.

It seems to me that we capitalist are too easily led into a “dogmatic slumber” by our dominant ideology. I think that we too seldom stop and do a critical analysis of our way of life. I think we do not examine our egocentric and sociocentric tendencies enough.

Was the great depression of 1929 caused by a lack of global war?

Very good question!! I am going to try to find the answer.

Ierrellus: Was the great depression of 1929 caused by a lack of global war?"

K: the great depression had several different factors in
several different countries. In Europe, Germany still hadn’t
recovered from the horrible Peace treaty of 1918 and spent
most of the 1920’s in horrible economic problems.
The U.S. boom of the 1920’s was a mirage and
economically left millions behind mired in poverty and
despair. Europe was still trying to recover from World War 2.

Those are the players. The great collapse is generally agreed
to have started in the U.S. It was tied into the stock market and
general economic weakness the U.S. had at the time.

The stock market boom of the 1920s was fueled by
easy credit on the purchase of stocks. Basically,
the stock was bought with no money or very little money,
and the stock was paid back, by the increase in stock value.
so if the market went up, you could pay back the stock,
if the market went down, you were left with paying back
the money out of pocket. With the market collapse, everyone
had to buy the stocks out of pocket. This created
problems because people bought other things on credit,
cars, houses and the like.
It was a credit economy (sounds familiar) and as with
any credit economy, at some point, you gotta pay the piper.
Income in the U.S did not increase, so the big growth was
driven by credit. (still sounding very familiar)
So instead of an artificial growth driven by credit,
you have a slower but more sustainable growth driven
by increases in income.
Now the other problem in the U.S and elsewhere actually was
sections of the economy did not grow and in fact
declined, and that was the farming industry. as many farmers
fell into ruin during the 20’s as during the 30’s. Also the
working poor here and elsewhere did not improve their lot,
and that helped weakened the respective economies.
Kind of like a bridge, if you weaken a bridge a little
bit at a time, eventually the bridge will fail even a bridge
that has been built very strong, will still fail if weakened
enough.

Which by the way, is the case made
for the upcoming collapse of the U.S. economy because
the top has been strengthen, but the middle and bottom
have been weakened and in any structure, the
structure is held up by the middle and bottom, not the
top. Thus economic failure is imminent in the U.S.

Kropotkin

Peter

Does this mean that a lack of global war was not a significant factor in that depression? If there had been a war would the depession have happened? Many claim that WWII was the reason we came out of the depression.

coberst:
Does this mean that a lack of global war was not a significant factor in that depression? If there had been a war would the depression have happened? Many claim that WWII was the reason we came out of the depression."

K: actually, keynesian economics is the idea that the government
pumps primes the economy when the private sector cannot
do so. The way a government can do this several different ways.
One of the many ways is the massive building programs such
as the ones in the U.S. during the 1930’s. Another way is
the way Reagan did in the 1980’s via the massive military
build up the U.S did during those years. War is just another
means of keynesian economics. Using government
to build up the economy. Now the important factor is
how the build up is done. Both Reagan and the village idiot
way is wrong and will/does damage the economy.
Why? Because of who benefits. Reagen and the village idiot
use of Keynesian benefits is for the rich and already wealthy,
Which does not benefit the average citizen. And this is key
for the use of Keynesian economic. Its value is for the average
citizen. The idea is to rise up the whole. Float up the entire
ship. Reagan and the village idiot is basically about
redistribution of wealth, take from the bottom and
middle and give to the rich. Reverse Robing Hood.
So economically, global war is really Keynesian economics.
And this would be the economic benefit for a country,
not the war itself.

Kropotkin

Portent:

War will not stop because it is the will of the people. This includes those that are against war as well. Humans do not engage in, or ignore, what they find repulsive.

Thus, humanity must change to prevent war. Since war is faught by people just coming out of childhood it is the nature of childhood that creates war. This cannot be changed.

Humans enjoy war from a child-like impulse and from a deeper boredom with life.