The dangers of retaliation are the same in every era.
Dead enemies don't retaliate.
I am quite unconvinced of that. Note that Adam Smith's invisible hand is NOT cooperation.
For the limited purposes I am discussing, yes it is. Just because the payoff matrix favors cooperation doesn't make it not-cooperation.
And take, say, socialism of the USSR and Mao's China variety -- do you think it encourages to cooperate or defect? Or how about the Roman Empire?
The USSR encouraged defection; just look at how, whenever food production was particularly problematic, the USSR would briefly swap over to a semi-capitalist system for a few years, and miraculously food production would increase. The farmers routinely defected under the soviet economic system, hiding whatever they could to sell on the black market, and meeting the bare minimum for the quotas, where they didn't get the quotas reduced for hardships which were always somehow worse when they didn't own the product of their labors.
Same thing with Mao's China.
Can't say much regarding the Roman Empire, as I haven't studied its economic system to any degree.
That's a different topic, but it seems to me to be mostly about the definition of "capitalism". I don't think "pure" capitalism ever existed anywhere.
I am heading off a common line of debate before it happens, because I've had this particular argument many, many times before, albeit never in quite these terms.
For the limited purposes I am discussing, yes it is.
At which point I no longer understand what do you mean by "cooperation".
just look at how, whenever food production was particularly problematic, the USSR would briefly swap over to a semi-capitalist system for a few years
Huh? That, um, never happened except for once in the 1920s. I have no idea what are you talking about.
The farmers routinely defected under the soviet economic system, hiding whatever they could to sell on the black market
I don't think that was as routine as you seem t...
This thread is for asking any questions that might seem obvious, tangential, silly or what-have-you. Don't be shy, everyone has holes in their knowledge, though the fewer and the smaller we can make them, the better.
Please be respectful of other people's admitting ignorance and don't mock them for it, as they're doing a noble thing.
To any future monthly posters of SQ threads, please remember to add the "stupid_questions" tag.