The Capitalist Peace: Why a Capitalist World Means a World At Peace [View all]

[BrentWil]

I posted this awhile back. I have some other thoughts on it. I still think that Capitalism, in general, does produce a general reduction in warfare. I also think that in general, it means a reduction in human suffering. However, the government does have a role. Extreme concentration of wealth, for example, is a problem that only the government can solve. In relation to world peace, concentration of wealth creates concentration of political power. I would suggest that while there is certainly benefits of liberal economic policies, the extreme behaviors and consequences must be regulated against. This should be done in a way that doesn't destroy the underlying system.

That being said, when nations have have economic relationships with one another, they share common interests. For example, China and The United States depend on each other economically that a war between them would produce a major disruption in both economies. These type of relationship can and do lead to a reduction in armed conflict. In The Capitalist Peace, Erik Gartzke out of Columbia provides an analysis of this. It is a very good paper and thought it would promote discussion here. The link is below:

http://dss.ucsd.edu/~egartzke/publications/gartzke_ajps_07.pdf

I think he is rather convincing in his argument and the methodology he uses to show his argument.