Political Scientist have long studied WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to create and test theories regarding the causes that increase the chances of war. The three main categories of thought on this issue are political realism, political economy, and political sociology whose basis lies on states decisions being based on power, economic gains, and ideologies respectively. Within each school of thoughts are multiple theories including cult of the offensive, polarity, and Marxist tradition. However, the most convincing hypothesis of the cause of war comes from a realist theory. The hypothesis states that established democracies decrease the chance of war. Despite the validity of this hypothesis, this does not imply that the United States should work
…show more content…
While some major powers were already democracies during WWI, quite a few — such as Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Germany — were not. If Austria-Hungary was a democracy then they would have had to get legislators approval before issuing demands, rejecting Serbia’s offers of restitution, or declaring war on Serbia. Because there are substantially more people voting in a democracy then a non democracy, this lessens the chance of Austria-Hungary going to war. Furthermore, if Russia was a democracy then the Tsar would have to get approval for mobilizing troops and declaring war on Austria-Hungary. Like the previous example, this means that there is less of a chance of war because there are more representatives voting. Lastly, if Germany’s democratic checks and balances were stronger than there would have been more pushback for mobilizing and declaring a blank check, therefore lessening the chance of war. Furthermore, if all of these counties were democracies then according to liberal internationalism, they would be fundamentally less likely to go to war with one another and WWI would have been avoided (Doyle 1156 ). WWII might have been avoided as well if the Axis Powers were democracies. If Germany never voted in a third reign and remained a democracy many of their imperialistic actions would have been avoided according to Schumpeter’s liberal pacifism theory (1153). Germany would have …show more content…
This is because “democratizing states are more inclined to fight wars than are states that do not undergo regime change” ("The Democratic Peace Idea."). Democratizing states are weak, unstable, and can be taken advantage by “diverse” groups that rise to power, threatened elites, and other conflicting powers that can lead to civil wars ("The Democratic Peace Idea.") Examples of this can be seen with the United States intervention and democratization in Iraq. After the United States removed Saddam Hussein’s regime, they implemented a democratic government in Iraq. They worked with Iraq to create a constitution, implement elections, and create a peaceful transfer of political power (Kadhim). However, as the democratization of Iraq was underway many problems arose. Massive violence continued, there was looting and infrastructure breakdown, ethnic-cleansing campaigns, refusal of political groups to cooperate with one another, and political corruption (Katz); (Kadhim). Citizens faced lack of security, high unemployment, and collapse of services (Kadhim). Iraq was also unsure of how they wanted to structure their democracy. People were divided on the limitations of the central government, party power, and regional power (Kadhim). Furthermore, the Iraqi military was too weak to defend the country from aggressors
While some major powers were already democracies during WWI, quite a few — such as Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Germany — were not. If Austria-Hungary was a democracy then they would have had to get legislators approval before issuing demands, rejecting Serbia’s offers of restitution, or declaring war on Serbia. Because there are substantially more people voting in a democracy then a non democracy, this lessens the chance of Austria-Hungary going to war. Furthermore, if Russia was a democracy then the Tsar would have to get approval for mobilizing troops and declaring war on Austria-Hungary. Like the previous example, this means that there is less of a chance of war because there are more representatives voting. Lastly, if Germany’s democratic checks and balances were stronger than there would have been more pushback for mobilizing and declaring a blank check, therefore lessening the chance of war. Furthermore, if all of these counties were democracies then according to liberal internationalism, they would be fundamentally less likely to go to war with one another and WWI would have been avoided (Doyle 1156 ). WWII might have been avoided as well if the Axis Powers were democracies. If Germany never voted in a third reign and remained a democracy many of their imperialistic actions would have been avoided according to Schumpeter’s liberal pacifism theory (1153). Germany would have …show more content…
This is because “democratizing states are more inclined to fight wars than are states that do not undergo regime change” ("The Democratic Peace Idea."). Democratizing states are weak, unstable, and can be taken advantage by “diverse” groups that rise to power, threatened elites, and other conflicting powers that can lead to civil wars ("The Democratic Peace Idea.") Examples of this can be seen with the United States intervention and democratization in Iraq. After the United States removed Saddam Hussein’s regime, they implemented a democratic government in Iraq. They worked with Iraq to create a constitution, implement elections, and create a peaceful transfer of political power (Kadhim). However, as the democratization of Iraq was underway many problems arose. Massive violence continued, there was looting and infrastructure breakdown, ethnic-cleansing campaigns, refusal of political groups to cooperate with one another, and political corruption (Katz); (Kadhim). Citizens faced lack of security, high unemployment, and collapse of services (Kadhim). Iraq was also unsure of how they wanted to structure their democracy. People were divided on the limitations of the central government, party power, and regional power (Kadhim). Furthermore, the Iraqi military was too weak to defend the country from aggressors