The Kabul times, Afghanistan Trustable News Agency.

War and colonization fundamental cycle of capitalism

Rutherford Hayes, the 19th President of the United States, commented on the capitalist system, stating that this government is no longer a government by the people, for the people, and of the people; instead, it is a government of large companies, by large companies, and for large companies. On the other hand, Paul Stevenson, an American writer and thinker, remarked on the reality of the capitalist system, stating that, in my belief, capitalism is an economic system that leads to extreme inequalities in society, and these inequalities have very negative consequences for all of humanity; it is necessary to undermine the capitalist system, but it is not sufficient. According to Adam Smith, greed and the love of money and possessions lead to economic growth and development in society. This perspective was supported by other thinkers of that time, such as David Hume. “Religious concepts and ideas are harmful to society because contentment and lack of greed in society cause people to have less desire for wealth and possessions. On the contrary, individual               sins such as greed, stinginess, and excessive desire lead to an increase in economic production in society,” said David Hume. This perspective found supporters like Voltaire and gradually became prevalent in Europe over time. Thus, individuals and governments in Europe adopted these perspectives as their guiding principles and justified all their inappropriate actions in their wake. In the eighteenth century, mercantilism (the economic doctrine of mercantilists) dominated certain parts of Europe, especially in Britain. In this economic ideology, the government took measures to support domestic production and exports to other countries. During this time, the Netherlands and later England were carriers of the capitalist system, and England, for its economic growth, needed two types of markets: one for cheap or free raw materials and the other for the sale of its economic goods. It was here that England colonized rich countries with natural resources or agricultural capacity and plundered their resources. The most prominent example in this regard is the East India Company and the Opium Wars, where the English produced opium in India and the surrounding region to sell it to the people of China. As a result, China protested and resisted this English action, leading to the mentioned war. With the expansion of Adam Smith’s economic concepts, such as free-market economics, free trade, absolute advantage, and others, the mercantilist space became less prominent. Through the adoption of Adam Smith’s economic ideas, England was able to establish the world’s most robust economy. In the late 19th century, the United States emerged as a formidable economic power, vigorously competing until severe damage was inflicted on the economies of Europe and England during the First and Second World Wars. On the one hand, as a result of winning World War II and implementing the Marshall Plan in Western Europe, America transformed into an economic superpower. In 1900 AD, the United States stepped into the arena of international politics for the first time. Wealthy Americans at that time felt that by involving the United States in international politics, they could garner more benefits for their companies. Consequently, these capitalists made investments within the government. Since then, the U.S. government has resembled more a large publicly traded company than a state—a company engaged in global trade. As this large corporation consists of multinational companies within it, such as major oil companies, large weapon manufacturers, and so on, its foreign policy and regional strategies are also influenced by these corporations. The Western economy, particularly that of the United States, experienced unprecedented growth during the First and Second World Wars. Consequently, capitalist economies always perceive opportunities for economic growth during significant wars. As John Maynard Keynes, a renowned British economist of the 20th century, puts it, “During a war, government expenditures rise, leading to increased employment in those economies.” In other words, Keynes considers the existence of war crucial for the economic growth of large corporations and colonial governments. On the other hand, considering the history of the formation of the U.S. government, it is observed that the institutions and essential apparatus of the United States government, shaped and developed during wars, inherently lean towards a wartime posture. When the United States engages in foreign wars, the agencies of this government function systematically and in coordination with each other. However, in times of peace, these institutions gradually lose their coordination over time, and their effectiveness significantly diminishes compared to the wartime state. Continue… Firooz Ahmad Ebrahimi (University Lecturer) significant

Related posts

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

The Kabul times, Afghanistan Trustable News Agency.