anon_wufe said in #3794 2mo ago:
Major countries do not want minor countries with nukes. One genuine fear is that as proliferation spreads, the chance of it ending up with someone unstable increases. The second is that it affects their ability to coerce them beyond certain limits. Moreover, it will discourage any coercion due to fear of testing those limits.
They may dress up such things in terms of risk and non-proliferation, and those who work in such areas may genuinely believe it, but I am inclined to believe a realist makes considerations mainly at the base level of physics and atoms. Spoken or written claims are simply unreliable; only the presence or lack of ability suffices.
We may consider that large swaths of unhappiness come from that of people being bound to the wills of others, which may not have their best interest at heart. As for whether a major state can be like a parent, and the minor state a child, so that parent dictates to child as child may not know best: I feel no significant difference between the types or races of man in natural temperament, nor are interests between states aligned like family.
When one center collapses, and we see this in our country today, the periphery decays. As the population size scales, the actual opportunities decrease. There are inefficiencies in smaller states: every European head can sit around and feel important, but from the perspective of actual living this may not be bad.
Had there been some powerful weapon to prevent aggregation, there would be more diversity, more independence, and a lesser risk of decay affecting people at great numbers. That the Confederacy does not exist today will remain a great what-if, and we may consider that Jim Crow laws were holding back pernicious elements unforeseen to the liberal mind despite the real cruelties of the time.
https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5QadS4SD8_d2Tz8DY4OMUNOLWZj1emB_5k_4NYJ5-T-YtWs7zCen9dmw93PkPK73QrQ4ckXWVfzPg36N2htSEYxgLBKQ_jlvB_zFJS67NypLz4M5DC-OAplG4uaxPDouTqhLCe1nJ1hxwGDgK-VFBEl2UwhqS2Pa6ZgYZc6DoQvwbnV1bUUzCvgquYHx6skLPSj-zklpEhHiDpwJGOyx9SHktEWUF-_ct-VNKJ7LWD1PVii25zPl-NRflBGhS6HYjdt4jj-389yInN7CFz9brPbVjYV3NUQ#page=184.16
They may dress up such things in terms of risk and non-proliferation, and those who work in such areas may genuinely believe it, but I am inclined to believe a realist makes considerations mainly at the base level of physics and atoms. Spoken or written claims are simply unreliable; only the presence or lack of ability suffices.
We may consider that large swaths of unhappiness come from that of people being bound to the wills of others, which may not have their best interest at heart. As for whether a major state can be like a parent, and the minor state a child, so that parent dictates to child as child may not know best: I feel no significant difference between the types or races of man in natural temperament, nor are interests between states aligned like family.
When one center collapses, and we see this in our country today, the periphery decays. As the population size scales, the actual opportunities decrease. There are inefficiencies in smaller states: every European head can sit around and feel important, but from the perspective of actual living this may not be bad.
Had there been some powerful weapon to prevent aggregation, there would be more diversity, more independence, and a lesser risk of decay affecting people at great numbers. That the Confederacy does not exist today will remain a great what-if, and we may consider that Jim Crow laws were holding back pernicious elements unforeseen to the liberal mind despite the real cruelties of the time.
https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5QadS4SD8_d2Tz8DY4OMUNOLWZj1emB_5k_4NYJ5-T-YtWs7zCen9dmw93PkPK73QrQ4ckXWVfzPg36N2htSEYxgLBKQ_jlvB_zFJS67NypLz4M5DC-OAplG4uaxPDouTqhLCe1nJ1hxwGDgK-VFBEl2UwhqS2Pa6ZgYZc6DoQvwbnV1bUUzCvgquYHx6skLPSj-zklpEhHiDpwJGOyx9SHktEWUF-_ct-VNKJ7LWD1PVii25zPl-NRflBGhS6HYjdt4jj-389yInN7CFz9brPbVjYV3NUQ#page=184.16
referenced by: >>3797
Major countries do n