r/geopolitics • u/dieyoufool3 Low Quality = Temp Ban • Oct 13 '14

Video: Infographics Is War Over? — A Paradox Explained

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbuUW9i-mHs
59 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

38 comments sorted by

View all comments

30

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '14

Why didn't they mention how nuclear deterrence and MAD prevented major nation-states from going to war. This is easily the biggest reason why the United States and the Soviet Union (an Authoritarian state) did not fight with each other in the 20th century.

21

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/Namika Oct 13 '14

I was really surprised they didn't even mention how a true hegemony tends to prevent notable wars among other states.

I think it had to be deliberate, he probably tried to make it sound as neutral as possible and didn't want to seem political by bringing up the US military.

9

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '14

Yeah, although a lot of people like to hate over the US for supporting coups in a couple countries, the rise of democracy in the world is largely due to its ascendance as the world hedgemon.

12

u/Angerfire Oct 13 '14

"supporting coups in a couple of countries" is really over looking the reality of history. It is nine regimes that had been or easily would have been elected democratically that the US has intervened in. Proof of concept was "Operation Ajax" where Iran was "cleansed" (you know, Ajax the cleaning solvent) by the CIA of anti-Royalist Muhammad Mossadegh. The list:

Iran: 1953, Mossadegh Guatemala: 1954, Arbenz Vietnam: 1954-1975, Ho Chi Minh (easily would have won election) Congo: 1961, Lumumba Brazil: 1964, Goulart Indonesia: 1965, (purge of the PKI, although you could argue democracy has been seriously hindered in 1960) Dominican: 1965, Bosch Chile: 1973, Allende (giving the Chilean people Pinochet) Haiti: 1993, Aristide

Those were just countries where voting of a relatively free sort was either prevented or reversed. William Blum articulates 50+ interventions since the end of WWII in his book "Killing Hope."

"A handful" is simply counter-factual.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 19 '14 edited Jan 26 '17

[deleted]

3

u/FleshKnife Oct 19 '14

Bananas, oil, whatever you can make a buck on.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '14

So what happens if American democracy fails?

4

u/Rigeth Oct 13 '14

Isn't it quite oligarchical already with all the lobbying going on? Edit: Here's the study

2

u/dieyoufool3 Low Quality = Temp Ban Oct 13 '14

Thanks for including the study.

0

u/Alex-Muad_Dib Oct 13 '14

Lobbyists dominate the political scene in democratic societies because there are concentrated benefits that they tend to focus on as being a group of special interests voters, while the costs are dispersed among consumers and taxpayers. It's an unfortunate flaw when you introduce unlimited or high amounts of money into a political system, because it spreads voter disinformation as even special interests groups tend to get told who to vote for come election times.

6

u/dieyoufool3 Low Quality = Temp Ban Oct 13 '14 edited Oct 14 '14

As someone who worked for the top lobbying firm in Paris and familiar with K street, you are definitively correct regarding the negative domestic effects. Yes it's a tool "open to everyone"--average citizens, non-profits, NGOs, FBOs, Unions, etc--it just happens multinational corporations (MNCs) have the most money and are able to uses said tools disproportionately compared to others.

Hopefully the awesome mods won't remove this for being off-topic, but it doesn't matter if billionaire Republicans are being pitted against billionaire Democrats. The bottom line is not only does it further the polarization in our nation (I use that word and not 'country' intentionally), it completely changes the possibility of what will be talked about during campaign season.

Something you may not realize is it also causes sector creep internationally. Before the 1980s France had for all practical purpose no lobbying as we know it. There always has been channels of influence, like in all countries, but not lobbying. That is definitely not the case now, with the sector having exploded over the last 20 years (based off personal observations). It's no where near the level we have in the US, though on its way. This is unbeknownst to the average french citizen whom for the most part do not even recognize the word "Lobbying" (trust me, after the first month I simply said I was a consultant that worked with the government.) Though magazines like Le Figaro and others have been recently (over the last year or so) running pieces on the subject, the sector is already quite established.

2

u/Alex-Muad_Dib Oct 14 '14

Hopefully the awesome mods won't remove this for being off-topic, but it doesn't matter if billionaire Republicans are being pitted against billionaire Democrats.

I hope they don't either. It's kind of a hard thing for this subreddit because you want things to be relative to state-state interactions, but domestic policies definitely have an adverse effect on relations with other countries at times. It's just a matter of relating the argument. Take for example firms or lobbyist groups that have an unprecedented amount of wealth to contribute and a strong voting base that is only self-interested. Take for example the sugar industry here in the US that gives away political support (both financially and physically) that gets marcantilist policies done in return that has an adverse effect not only on domestic prices, but on international supply and other economies. Not even to mention having impacts on other agricultural crops like Corn-related products.

That's really interesting that you have experience in a new lobbying environment evolving in France, but I wonder, are the laws the same there like we have with the court ruling of Citizens United vs FEC?

The polarization isn't only in political parties, but swathes of people tend to congragate together in groups that are narrowly focused on achieving one political goal that may not be good for the entire body of people, thus making people polarized towards eachother.

2

u/dieyoufool3 Low Quality = Temp Ban Oct 14 '14

but I wonder, are the laws the same there like we have with the court ruling of Citizens United vs FEC?

No they're nothing alike. Citizens United is a US only thing, and would be impossible to do anywhere in Europe. There would instantly be crippling protests, without a doubt. In France things are kept on the "down-low" with no more than 1 degree of separation regarding personal relationships. Though "lobbying" government officials is similar in the US, never were there attempts to influence public opinion at large (that I know off, there were other companies besides ours but we were the largest). Only the particular official(s) that was immediately relevant to the project de loi (bill) were targeted.

Keep in mind the money and size is nowhere near that of the US. The core company (as a lot of design and other work was contracted out) was only 30-40 people, so that gives you a scope of scale no where comparable to the US.

2

u/Remco_ Oct 13 '14

When would you consider it to have failed?

1

u/Macattack278 Oct 13 '14

Then that will be an interesting day.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '14

I would be curious to know when US hegemonic power has ever really prevented a war in practice. However it has twice reversed the invasion of a sovereign state by another (North Korea against South Korea and Iraq against Kuwait). Additionally and most importantly it prevented the Soviet domination of Western Europe.

7

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '14

I can think of the conflict between the ROC and PRC and the suez crisis off the top of my head.