Capitalism may provoke wars by its need for markets and resources, and today, by its influence on contracts and war industry, but I don't see much difference in the behavior of communist economies either.

The constant and ancient historical theme of countries invading others for wealth, resources, slaves, trade routes, or strategic position, convinces me that this is not an ideological imperative. Ideologies, religions, patriotism, nationalism, are factors, but I believe they are more usefully seen as means to fire up populations and justify aggression than as causes for it. Even in cases where it can be argued that economics was a secondary cause (like in the Crusades), the fact that booty was to be had certainly made the decision to go to war easier to make.

In a way, you're right: follow the money. Now, civil wars may be another case entirely, although even in the case of our own Civil War, many scholars believe economic rivalry, not slavery or State vs Federal rights was the key issue.

The reason I brought this issue up was because I feel that nations often go to war for the wrong reasons, or fail to prepare for war for the wrong reasons. I am not a pacifist, I believe there is at least one bad guy in every conflict, but more often there are two, sometimes even three. "Z" posted an article on CE by Pat Buchanan which I think illustrates this point quite accurately.

Posted by z on 8/14/2008 10:24:43 PM