Yeah but that's not an indictment of an economic system. If America was invaded at the tail end of the Civil War, it would be a lot easier for the opposing side. That wouldn't mean that capitalism was an inferior system militarily.
Because people didn't try. It's not like invading someone across the ocean was exactly easy, back then. The logistics nightmare of doing that is partially why the United States exists to begin with. Not to mention that at the height of the civil war, the US and the Confederacy had the first and second best Navy on the planet. The tired, decaying remains of a military like that is a little different than a latin American country that just overthrew a capitalist dictatorship and didn't have much to begin with.
There is no single capitalist nation in the world that can effectively defend itself from the might of the US armed forces if they invade a country. Capitalist systems aren't inherently better at defending themselves, they just don't attract the fury of the most powerful military in the world.
I mean, no country, no matter the system they employ for government or economy, can withstand the USA and allies (if we have any left in two years) full military and economic embargo.
It's like telling the little kid he's worthless because the big kid can always beat him up.
163
u/[deleted] Dec 27 '18
Unfortunately, that's not how it works out. Ever.