• MAGISTERLUDI
    +2
    @Jack -

    Correlations for most anything can be found if you look for them, does not establish fact(s).

  • Jack
    +2
    @MAGISTERLUDI -

    It isn't correlations they are talking about, it is predictive power. Restricted trade leads to war, while vigorous trade prevents it.

  • MAGISTERLUDI (edited 9 years ago)
    +2
    @Jack -

    All reliant on their correlations of past history. Hell, one could show causation(s) from anything if so inclined. Of course integrated trade would be a factor, and less of incentive, that's a no-brainer. But to state it's a barrier is misleading. Is/was trade relevant to ISIS, was it to Hitler, Castro, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, et al. In some cases trade may have became a later issue , but not the reason(s) for the initial aggression(s). Ownership, plain and simple would most obvious be the greater incentive, not trade imbalance.

    • Jack
      +1
      @MAGISTERLUDI -

      Yes, trade was extremely important to those people, and economic issues are what most people attribute the rise of Nazism and the fall of Communism to.