= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
lmm comments on Open thread, Nov. 24 - Nov. 30, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (317)
I give Napoleon a hand, on the basis that he was one of the more scientifically-minded world leaders, and the theory that a strong France makes our future more multipolar. For the same reason I try to spread the notion of the limited-liability corporation in the islamic world (no idea how to do that though). I might try to convince nations of the (AIUI genuine) non-profitability of colonialism.
If you want multi-polar, Napoleon is the last person you should help. He was clearly acting to reduce the number of Great Powers to 1. He even succeed for a bit re: Prussia & Austria.
Alternatively, if he wins, how do you prevent France v. USA instead of Russia v. USA.
If it ends up more even and more positive-sum, I call that a win.
Why would you expect any different outcome at all? Two-power dynamics often unstable - absent external stabilizer like MAD.
You just have to keep the Canadian-Mexican border quiet :-)