Erik Gartzke makes the claim that capitalism leads to peace. I must admit that it’s hard for me to accept the evidence made by his research. I feel that I do not understand enough the measurement issues to discuss its validity. I do not really understand how he differentiate properly democracy and capitalism. Do we have cases of democracies that are not capitalists and that went to war with each other?
What about the fact that conflicts are not always between two states? What if capitalism raised inequalities inside a country and lead to more domestic conflicts?
I think that it is hard for me to accept that the quest for profit is behind peace, but it’s just maybe because I am a very idealistic person who believes too much in moral principles. Furthermore, I tend to adopt the constructivist point of view which says that moral norms matters in world politics and that it could also be a factor that leads to peace.
Concerning Oneal and Russett I don’t really know what to get from their article as it confirms so many different claims: “Democracy, economic interdependence, and involvement in international organizations reduce the incidence of militarized interstate disputes” (34). But then, “realist influences also reduced the likelihood of disputes” (35). So what? I am a little bit skeptical because it is a combination of different factors and it is hard to distinguish what really matters. But maybe this complex combination is closer to reality. My view would be that it seems very difficult to identify only one reason why countries don’t fight each other.
However, I feel I need more explanations about those articles before discussing them in depth. Maybe after next class things will be more clear!