1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/10462/can-the-free-market-wage-war/

Can the Free Market Wage War?

August 14, 2009 by

Interventionism addresses a topic that I have found nowhere else in Mises: his analysis of how a free society should wage war. What is the alternative to total war with total state control? Mises’s response will surprise no one: he favors reliance on the free market. To support his view that a market economy can effectively wage modern war, Mises advances a surprising claim about the early part of World War II. FULL ARTICLE

{ 58 comments }

Guisan August 17, 2009 at 11:46 pm

“As for switzerland, the country was just lucky that the Nazies didn’t want living room in the mountains! ”

actually they did, plus they wanted the gold too. Hitler felt that if Napoleon could take over the swiss, so could he and had several invasion plans drawn up and one almost executed (it was delayed because of Operation Barbarrossa.) “Operation Tannenbaum”. So please refrain from posting in complete ignorance.

As to the Reduit strategy being used as a model by anarchists.. obviously it’s speculation, however it doesn’t seem that big a leap.

last knight August 18, 2009 at 12:17 am

“amateurs talk tactics, pros talk logistics”
“nervos belli, pecuniam infinitam”

The modern war machine requires constant, expensive supplies. Except for limited, surprise attacks and a few other exceptions, the war will always be won by the strongest economy with the shortest supply routes. Whatever the political system…

Flix August 18, 2009 at 2:34 am

All this talk of guerrilla warfare and nobody talks about a present, real world example! As I mentioned before… just look at Afghanistan! The most powerful military in the world is bleeding to death and losing. Ignore the msm headlines and talk to soldiers on the ground: they take the ground and a week after they’ve left they lose it again. They beat the insurgents, only to see them regroup. They spend money on reconstruction, only to see it end up in the hands of their enemies… Nato forces are now driving supply convoys over the Russian route! That’s an extra 2000 miles because their supply lines over Pakistan keep getting ambushed. The more I study it the more I realize why Afg is the graveyard of Empires… Machiavello said it a long time ago, it is not the same conquering and holding an unified, centralized country (like Persia) to a decentralized territory without one government (Italy)… that will boil over in constant rebellion.

P.M.Lawrence August 18, 2009 at 3:10 am

Last Knight wrote “The modern war machine requires constant, expensive supplies. Except for limited, surprise attacks and a few other exceptions, the war will always be won by the strongest economy with the shortest supply routes. Whatever the political system… ”

The first sentence is accurate, but the rest is wrong (in fact a non sequitur) – because Last Knight confused “modern” with “all future”. The key things have changed in the past, and may well be different enough in the future for that reasoning not to apply.

Guerilla August 18, 2009 at 10:36 am

“You’re dreaming. Guerilla warfare is used as a strategy of last resort, and that is for a reason. What country do you know that has a decent economy that has a policy of relying only on guerilla warfare for defense? There are none, because it’s insane!”
There are none, because it is not useful for the state. Central political power needs central military power to provide propaganda, a sens of security to inhabitants, even though behind the curtains the army is a pathetic aged useless money drain that wouldnt stand a chance against any invader(ie baltic states).

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: