The most common of these forms was the tribe, which was based around imagined descent from a common ancestor. Prior to contracts, economic production in advanced societies was organized mainly on a household basis, with markets being secondary appendages, and tightly regulated by governing authorities. Early tribal elites presided over the redistribution of surpluses redistributive chiefs ; eventually being supplanted in this role by just issuing coins and demanding taxes back in return, which allowed decentralized exchange to take place. They then skimmed off the surplus of the resulting commercial expansion.
A somewhat similar argument could be made for the WW II, but, in general, preventive wars are nothing new in human history. But what about Russia, one may ask, or China. Taken at face value the question may seem strange—both China, and especially Russia are nuclear armed states which can defend themselves.
They do have deterrents and that supposedly should stop any attempt on any kind of war on them. This all is true but only so far. One may consider the current geopolitical situation in which China has all but created a new alternative economic power poleand in which the US finds herself increasingly in the position of the still extremely important but second and, eventually, even third place player in Eurasian economic development.
This is not the case with Russia. It becomes also true when one begins to look at doctrinal and technological developments both in the US and Russia. The contrast is startling, even if one considers a very dubious US intelligence analysis on Russia.
This is not the case with the United States who is a consummate expeditionary power and fights wars not on own territory, and whose population and political elites are not conditioned by continental warfare.
This quantification remains virtually unchanged for modern day Russia. Even famous Russophobe and falsifier, Richard Pipes, was forced to admit that: Such figures are beyond the comprehension of most Americans. Such a country Russia tends also to assess the rewards of defense in much more realistic terms.
As Michael Lind writes: The possibility of military defeat and invasion are usually left out of discussion…. The United States, if one discounts Pearl Harbor has not suffered a serious invasion from ; Britain, though it has been bombed from the air in the 20th centuryhas been free from foreign invasion even longer….
Elsewhere in the world, political elites cannot as easily separate foreign policy and economics.
Russia lives under these pressures constantly and, in fact, Russians as ethnos were formed and defined by warfare. Russia is also defined by her weapons and it is here where we may start looking for one of the most important rationales for anti-Russian hysteria in Washington which have proceeded unabated sincethe return of Crimea inin reality even earlier.
The problem here is not with Russia, which offers unprecedented access to all kinds of foreigners, from businessmen and tourists to political and intelligence overt and covert professionals.
That is the reality not defined by meaningless Wall Street economic indices. Whether this lesson will be learned by the combined West is yet to be seen. So far, the learning process has been slow for US crowd which cheered on US deindustrialization and invented a fairy tale concept of post-industrial, that is non-productive, virtual economy.
No other nation with the exception of the US and Russia, not even China, can produce and procure a cutting edge military technology which has capabilities beyond the reach of everyone else.
Here, the US establishment, also known as the Neocon interventionist cabal, it seems, has begun to wake up to actual reality, not the fictitious one that the US can allegedly create for itself.
Such as the fact that Russia, in a planned and well executed manner, without any unnecessary fanfare, launched a complete upgrade of her naval nuclear deterrent with the state of the art SSBNs of Borey-class Project and A.
They are not laughing anymore. As in the case with above mentioned Columbia-class SSBN, the GAO expects the cost of the whole program to be slightly above 97 billion dollars and that means that the average cost for each sub of this class will be around 8.
And this single example demonstrates well an abyss in fundamental approaches to the war between US and Russia: Here, United States is simply no competition to Russia and the gap not only remains, it widens with ever-increasing speed. As Colonel Daniel Davies admitted: Many times it was pointed out that direct linear comparison, dollar-for-dollar, of military budgets is wrong and does not reflect real military, in general, and combat, in particular, potentials in the least.
ASW, Air Defense and Sensors, including the ability to launch supersonic anti-shipping cruise missiles from kilometers and land-attack missiles from On both counts the US policy makers and doctrine mongers failed miserably. Symbolic they were not, with Russia resurrecting both divisions and armies as appropriate operational-tactical and operational-strategic units in order for a large scale combined arms operations.
While following closely the evolution of US forces within the framework of initially much touted Revolution in Military Affairs RMARussia never changed her focus on the large scale combined arms operations.
Nobody celebrated this victory and Russian Army was subjected, somewhat justifiably, to scathing criticism from many quarters. But it was clear already then that combined arms operations of large army units remain a principle method of the war between peer-to-peer state actors.
Things changed dramatically after the coup in Kiev and junta unleashing a war in Donbass. Brigade and Division size forces there engaged in a full blown combined arms warfare, including head to head armor clashes, employment, especially for LDNR forces, of full C4ISR capabilities and Net-Centric warfare principles.In my previous post, I wanted to “set the stage” as to why it was Northwestern Europe, and not the many other locations around the world where complex civilizations developed, that formed the basis of the modern world.
While it may seem as though communal or collective ownership of the means of production is the ideal scenario, it appears that it only works under a certain set of conditions and circumstances. Anecdote: There’s this really neat bit in the Feynman lectures where he notices that the ratio between the gravitational and electric forces in an atom is on the order of 10^37, and wonders how a number so large could happen in nature.
There is a popular point of view in some of Russia’s political circles, especially among those who profess monarchist views and cling to a famous meme of Tsarist Russia development statistics, that WW I was started by Germany to forestall Russia’s industrial development which would inevitably challenge Germany’s plans on domination of Europe.
d. efficiency and equality can both be achieved if the economic pie is cute into equal pieces.
a. efficiency refers to the size of the economic pie; equality refers to how the pie os divided. THE PENTAGON HAD INVITED BILLY GRAHAM’S SON, the Reverend Franklin Graham, to deliver the opening sermon for their National Day of Prayer service on May 6, The worship service, held as part of the chaplain’s regular program of multi-denominational religious events, was a joint effort.