pull down to refresh

I also wonder how much of that was due to various specific post-war factors, like high economic growth due to post-war rebuilding, American largesse in funding reconstruction and fighting communism, and the specter of communism causing the population to unite around a perceived common threat

I would also add that Europe has far more culturally in common with one another than say, the East or South. Also... we forget how short the time has been since WW2 in the grand scheme of things.

reply

I'd be interested in knowing how often Europe has gone 80 years without a war. I don't think it's been common for them.

reply

Yeah, same here. I don't think it is.

Hoppe does discuss this in his writings pointing out that the wars now are much worse(bloody/long) though. He's primarily talking about the world wars.

reply

Which could be part of why they became less common. The costs went way up and, since they no longer conquer and pillage, the benefits went way down.

reply
61 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 20 Jan

Maybe.

Hoppe argues that fiat money allowed the wars to be much longer and larger than before. Also that since the ideal of democracy has taken hold and the social contract idea of it being our consent of the governed that the care-taker leaders have less skin in the game.

After all, the idea of a King robbing you for his war is much easier to grapple with than the Prime minister using tax money and fiat money to pay for a war. These caretakers have less skin in the game.

I think the technology aspects can't be over-looked either. The threat of nuclear war has also likely played a role.

reply
The threat of nuclear war has also likely played a role.

For sure. It's not just a bunch of the common rabble who get killed in modern wars.

reply