Author Topic: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?  (Read 4090 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Material Defender

  • Food Scientist in Space
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
  • Gender: Male
  • Pilot of the Pyro-GX
In the history of the world, trade and merchants have always been juxtaposed against politicians and generals. In fact, Kings were often the head generals of their realm, as well as Emperors and the others. I'm just curious what do you think is more important in shaping the world.

The merchants or the "Kings"? Plutocracy or the Aristocracy?

I'm not sure, and I'm liable to say both... but hey. I wanna see what other people have as their opinion.
The material needs a defender more than the spiritual. If there is a higher power, it can defend itself from the material. Thus denotes 'higher power'.

"Not to know is bad. Not to want to know is worse. Not to hope is unthinkable. Not to care is unforgivable." -Nigerian Saying

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2012, 10:43:37 pm »
As numerous thinkers have pointed out, war and economics and politics are all the same (albeit 'by other means'). Countries go to war for economic reasons, one side wins- typically for economic or political reasons- and then the politicians try to recover, economically and politically.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline largeham

  • Dirty Pinko
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1326
  • Gender: Male
  • The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2012, 10:56:56 pm »
There is little to no separation between politics, war and economics.

My Little Comrade
My Little Comrade
Ah ah ah aaaaah!
(My Little Comrade)
I used to wonder what socialism could be!
(My Little Comrade)
Until you all shared its materialist dialectic with me!

Offline Material Defender

  • Food Scientist in Space
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
  • Gender: Male
  • Pilot of the Pyro-GX
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2012, 11:03:05 pm »
Except Trade, the main motivator of economics, is by and large halted during war. We've merged politics and economics together as time has progress (Why its highly unlikely we'd ever declare war on a large trade partner), but Roman politicians wanted to block silk road trade and the Indian Ocean Trade System was pretty peaceful.
The material needs a defender more than the spiritual. If there is a higher power, it can defend itself from the material. Thus denotes 'higher power'.

"Not to know is bad. Not to want to know is worse. Not to hope is unthinkable. Not to care is unforgivable." -Nigerian Saying

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2012, 11:12:03 pm »
Trade was largely stopped in which war? Wasn't in either of the World Wars. Nor in the Thirty Years' War.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline largeham

  • Dirty Pinko
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1326
  • Gender: Male
  • The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2012, 11:38:37 pm »
Except Trade, the main motivator of economics, is by and large halted during war.

What do you mean by the main motivator of economics? Economics has no motivation. Economic systems can.

Quote
Why its highly unlikely we'd ever declare war on a large trade partner

Tell that to Europe in 1914.

My Little Comrade
My Little Comrade
Ah ah ah aaaaah!
(My Little Comrade)
I used to wonder what socialism could be!
(My Little Comrade)
Until you all shared its materialist dialectic with me!

Offline Material Defender

  • Food Scientist in Space
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
  • Gender: Male
  • Pilot of the Pyro-GX
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2012, 11:56:51 pm »
Motivator... is not a good word choice. Not what I meant to say at all. I mean it is a very profitable system that economics are involved in. I don't know why I said "Motivator." I have some very odd word choices.

You cannot trade with someone you are at war with, by the way. Also, blockades ensure that some people can't trade. World War 1, the British effectively blockaded the Germans to 0$ in trade with countries it was not at war with, and was causing mass starvation because of it. In WW1 the Americans may have WASP connections with the British, there were a significant number of German and Irish descendants who would have been far more supportive of the German side in WW1, but trade would dictate that you go to war with the British (Huge boost in trade due to being unable to meet Britian's production needs compared to total shut down of trade with Germany already present). Though the Zimmerman Tellgram did the Germans no favors.

Though do note the words "Unlikely." Declaring war on a trade partner that would cripple your economy is kind of... stupid. I didn't mean trade stopped with everyone. "The french and Germans went to war, so the Italians and Spanish can't trade" or something like that. Blockades and total war tactics can cripple trade however during wartimes with unrelated members of the war. It was important to the North to Blockade the south during the war to reduce the effectiveness of their economy and lower the reason why someone might want to help them.

Though I am stating myself pretty poorly.
The material needs a defender more than the spiritual. If there is a higher power, it can defend itself from the material. Thus denotes 'higher power'.

"Not to know is bad. Not to want to know is worse. Not to hope is unthinkable. Not to care is unforgivable." -Nigerian Saying

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2012, 12:00:55 am »
Politics and war.  There are few economic events we talk about in history, and even those are normally done within a hairs breath of the mention of some conflict.  World War II still stand to this day as the biggest event in human history.
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline Old Viking

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1454
  • Gender: Male
  • Occasionally peevish
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2012, 05:02:03 pm »
Peace is an interval of rest between wars.
I am an old man, and I've seen many problems, most of which never happened.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2012, 06:05:10 pm »
The number of people killed in war increased pretty much in proportion to population until 1945. It then went into a massive and continuous decline until the present day. Nowadays, war is not a significant cause of mass death. We beat it.

Nuclear weapons- in my opinion- saved untold millions of lives.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2012, 07:05:51 pm »
The number of people killed in war increased pretty much in proportion to population until 1945. It then went into a massive and continuous decline until the present day. Nowadays, war is not a significant cause of mass death. We beat it.

Nuclear weapons- in my opinion- saved untold millions of lives.

We have not had a total war since 1945.
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2012, 07:11:41 pm »
Even medium-scale conventional war just doesn't happen any more, let alone world war. And it's because of nuclear weapons.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2012, 07:25:25 pm »
Never say never. 
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline largeham

  • Dirty Pinko
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1326
  • Gender: Male
  • The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2012, 08:57:40 pm »
The number of people killed in war increased pretty much in proportion to population until 1945. It then went into a massive and continuous decline until the present day. Nowadays, war is not a significant cause of mass death. We beat it.

Nuclear weapons- in my opinion- saved untold millions of lives.

We have not had a total war since 1945.

I guess it depends on what you mean by total war. The Korean War, the Vietnam War and the Iran-Iraq War probably count for some (or all in the case of the last) of the combatants.

My Little Comrade
My Little Comrade
Ah ah ah aaaaah!
(My Little Comrade)
I used to wonder what socialism could be!
(My Little Comrade)
Until you all shared its materialist dialectic with me!

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2851
Re: History: Economics or Politics (And Wars). Which is more important?
« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2012, 09:07:43 pm »
Holy shit, I think Fred and Nickerson agree!

Or is the fact that we haven't had total war since 1945 and we have had nuclear weapons since 1945 a coincidence?