3 ms·

The difficult thing about even very good prevention is that the absence of events is difficult to prove. Is interconnection perfect? obviously not. Does interc

by dv_dt 4y ago

The difficult thing about even very good prevention is that the absence of events is difficult to prove. Is interconnection perfect? obviously not. Does interconnection prevent more conflicts vs fully independent nations? Likely yes. I think what we are seeing is societies and governments forgetting how bad wars are for stability, on a backdrop of slowing or reversing quality of life for many modern nations.

Sakos 4y ago
Your mistake is believing that financial interdependence is what prevents conflict instead of, say, shared values, political interdependence, cultural exchange, etc. Things that aren't money bind countries together far, far, far stronger than a stack of money ever could. That's the biggest reason why trying to bind Russia financially failed, and why it's been failing with China for the past 20 years. Ideology is such a powerful tool that I don't understand how people still think money is so important.
- dv_dt 4y ago
  I don't think financial interdependence is exclusively what prevents conflict. Shared values and cultural exchanges develop when you spend more time interacting, and financial connections are one excuse to spend more time interacting. I actually wish more nations provided for a youth international travel trip as part of a high school post grad type public benefit. I think it would do a lot for long term peace in the world. It would be better if money weren't the primary driver for so much.
  - Sakos 4y ago
    > financial connections are one excuse to spend more time interacting. And it's not sufficient. Most people will buy products imported from China without ever interacting with Chinese people (or their culture) and Chinese will export products to the rest of the world without ever interacting with foreign cultures and their ideas and viewpoints. Tell me how a gas pipeline between Russia and Germany helped build ties between the citizens of either country, aside from the politicians who got rich off of it and turned into apologists.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> The difficult thing about even very good prevention is that the absence of events is difficult to prove. No, an inverse relation between propensity of dyads to go to war and their degree of trade integration wouldn't be hard to prove, if it were true.

by dv_dt 4y ago

Sakos 4y ago

Your mistake is believing that financial interdependence is what prevents conflict instead of, say, shared values, political interdependence, cultural exchange, etc. Things that aren't money bind countries together far, far, far stronger than a stack of money ever could. That's the biggest reason why trying to bind Russia financially failed, and why it's been failing with China for the past 20 years. Ideology is such a powerful tool that I don't understand how people still think money is so important.

dv_dt 4y ago
I don't think financial interdependence is exclusively what prevents conflict. Shared values and cultural exchanges develop when you spend more time interacting, and financial connections are one excuse to spend more time interacting. I actually wish more nations provided for a youth international travel trip as part of a high school post grad type public benefit. I think it would do a lot for long term peace in the world. It would be better if money weren't the primary driver for so much.
- Sakos 4y ago
  > financial connections are one excuse to spend more time interacting. And it's not sufficient. Most people will buy products imported from China without ever interacting with Chinese people (or their culture) and Chinese will export products to the rest of the world without ever interacting with foreign cultures and their ideas and viewpoints. Tell me how a gas pipeline between Russia and Germany helped build ties between the citizens of either country, aside from the politicians who got rich off of it and turned into apologists.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> The difficult thing about even very good prevention is that the absence of events is difficult to prove. No, an inverse relation between propensity of dyads to go to war and their degree of trade integration wouldn't be hard to prove, if it were true.