CronoDAS comments on Fight Zero-Sum Bias - Less Wrong

25 Post author: multifoliaterose 18 July 2010 05:57AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (153)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Blueberry 20 July 2010 11:49:15PM 3 points [-]

After a war, everyone is worse off, just some are more worse off than others.

At least in one point in history, it was possible to wage war as a strategic move, so that your country would gain more resources than you expended in war. This is probably not possible anymore, because of advances in weapon technology.

Comment author: CronoDAS 21 July 2010 06:07:03AM 2 points [-]

You can't really conquer another country and turn a profit on it these days, but it seems as though civil war can still pay: you can overthrow a dictator and install yourself in his place as the new dictator, and then allocate the spoils to yourself and your supporters. This seems to work best if there are exploitable natural resources (such as diamonds or oil) that you can gain control of.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 21 July 2010 09:37:49AM 1 point [-]

Civil war or coup?

Comment author: CronoDAS 21 July 2010 02:37:31PM 0 points [-]

Well, coups work better, but civil war seems to pay off at least some of the time. (At least you can sometimes get de facto independence from a local dictator.)

Comment author: jhuffman 27 July 2010 09:09:08PM 0 points [-]

Civil wars can be even better than a coup if you find external sponsorship.