Originally Posted by
AZJoe
No. The 1920s was an experiment in statist expansion. You mention cutting taxes, but remember, prior to 1914 there were no income taxes. The reduced 1920 taxes is still massive statist expansion by comparison.
As to the 1929 crash of the stock market bubble, look only to the statist central bank, the Federal Reserve, which did not even exist prior to 1914. The central planning statist central bank took control of monetary policy, artificially expanded the currency, creating market distortions and the the stock market bubble and general artificial market bubbles. When the statist central planners at the Federal Reserve tried to correct their manipulations by tightening money policies, they popped the bubbles leading to the following economic depression, which itself was exacerbated and prolonged by more statist market interventions in the 30s.
As to the causes of WWII, the rise of the NAZIs and the actions of imperialist Japan, those additionally were fueled by INTERVENTIONISM, not non-interventionism.
Remember Washington through its aggressive interventionist embargoes and sanctions, forcibly choked off Japan from 70% of its international trade and 90% of its oil supply prior to war. These interventionist acts of economic warfare left Japan with a lifespan of only a few months before economic death and no fuel. What would the US or any nation likely do when its very survival is on the table? They would resort to almost any act of desperation to survive. This is not rocket science. The results are very logical and predictable natural consequence of interventionism.
Further, as to World War II in Europe, It was the US interventionist entry into WWI that started the dominoes that caused WWII. Both the Austro-Hungarians and Germans had sought peace prior to US entry into WWI. It was US entry that emboldened France and England to reject peace efforts and seek the unconditional surrender leading to the punitive Treaty of Versailles, followed by the occupation of Germany, rape of its resources, and unrealistically punitive unattainable war reparations. That together with the resulting hyperinflation under the short lived Weimar Republic bolstered the nationalism and resentment, and directly enabled such a strong nationalistic figure as Hitler with his promises of rebuilding and greatness to become popular and in power.
Likewise in Russia, the people were begging for peace. Although Russia had some great successes against the Ottomans in the Caucasus and Eastern campaigns, its battles with the Germans was a complete meat grinder. The Tsar had remained popular with the peasants since the freeing of the serfs in 1861. However that sentiment rapidly turned with WWI, as the lower classes were the ones sustaining the brunt of the death and loss. They wanted peace. Lenin and the Bolshevists promised immediate peace with Germany and Austro-Hungary. Had peace come sooner, there most likely would not have been an October revolution, and maybe not even a February revolution either. Even after the revolutions, looking at the civil war between the red and white white armies, the predictions were the reds had no chance. They held no significant territory outside the 2 major cities. The whites had seasoned veteran officers and generals. However it was the perception of the attachment of the whites with the Czar and pointless war, and the reds associated with promise of peace that the whites lost much sympathy and support among the common masses. Had the peace come much sooner, sentiments likely would have been different.
Thus, without US intervention into WWI, not only would we likely have been spared the rise of the Third Reich and subsequent WW2, we also probably would not have had a Soviet Union.
Connect With Us