Main Topic: Coordinator Comments
The culture of war was invented long before the origins of capitalism. However, capitalism, in general, has prospered under the culture of war. Individual capitalist enterprises gain their greatest profits from the exploitation of industrial and agricultural workers, under the protection of military interventions both domestically and abroad. Many of the internal military interventions in the United States were undertaken in order to put down strikes or movements of the unemployed. The frequent external military interventions of the United States in Latin America throughout the 20th Century were intended to protect the ability of U.S. corporations to continue exploiting the resources, including human resources, of those countries.
A case can be made that this gave the capitalist countries a major advantage over socialist countries in their competition. There is no question that the major capitalist countries of the North profit greatly from the unequal terms of trade with the countries of the South while socialist countries do not normally have such sources of profit. For example, a study of Soviet economic relations published by Charles Wolf of the quasi-governmental think-tank, the Rand Corporation, in Science Magazine in 1985 showed that the net flow of wealth was from the Soviet Union outward to the other smaller socialist countries rather than inward as would the case in the neo-colonial capitalist countries.
Now that most of the socialist countries formerly allied with the Soviet Union have switched over to capitalist economies, socialism is promoted mostly by socialist political parties, many of which hold majorities in national and local governments. Does promoting a transition from capitalist to socialist economies contribute to a culture of peace?
|
Visitor CommentsTo add your own comments in this box, send them with title "game comments" to the following email:  |
|
1angloboy Jul. 08 2019,17:20
|
|
|
You seem to be referring to socialism as the form of government of the former Soviet Union. I think of socialism as medical care for the population and communism where the government owns the means of production. So even though Russia calls itself socialist it is more towards communist. I am tired though of all these labels that box in a multifaceted organization. Lets throw out all the ism's and look for new descriptors that can label a more humane form of government where the people that pay the taxes gain the services. However taking care of the peoples needs such as healthcare, education, mental health care, infrastructure is better than securing cheap labor and resources for the elite in foriegn countries with the taxes of the poor.
|
|
fighter Oct. 11 2010,08:08
|
|
|
Hello, i think that the question is not so much what kind of ideology. I believe some simple measures have to be taken, like overcome protectionism, one world currency, system of measures, language, and esp. remove the political parties, we don't need them!
|
|
