Test your Poly Sci!

[Jsx1]

Topic is Compare and contrast the views of Marx & Engels, on the one hand, and Klare, on the other, with regard to the economic origins of political conflict!

Thanks!

[Tufnel]

Marx and Engels theorized that hyper-inflation was the most robust determinative factor with regards to international conflict. To construct these theories, they drew primarily from Von Mises and other members of the Austrian School.

However, Klare instead proposed that the fundamental ill was that of overabundance - there is simply too much to go around. Here, he referred to resources. Oil, gas, red meat... Things that man must have in order to survive. His primary and most widely-respected theory contends that man fights because there is that over which he can fight. If there is no pie, how can anyone fight about how many pieces they receive? Thus, the truly fortunate societies are those without sufficient resources, for they are the least likely to go to war. His major influence was Leo Strauss.

Thus the two are similar in that they both grant supreme power to "who gets what, when." This is a unique approach, as most in politics and economics focus on the role of fox news in determining the outcome of conflicts. However, they differ in their attribution of importance to nutrition. While Klare believes that we would be better off without food over which to fight, Marx and Engels were convinced that we fight because we have no food.

Here's how you should cite me:

Tufnel. 2010. The Role of Red Meat in Conflict Determination. The Graduate Cafeterium. Interweb: webpage.