THREE JOURNAL RESPONSES
The war on terrorhas been quite controversial due to the numerous instances wherewestern countries have allegedly gone to battlefield for profitablegains. Most critics, for example, termed the US fight in Afghanistanto be a baseless conflict that sought to profit variousorganizations. The film of Blood and oil shows different aspects ofhow the enormous profits realized by petroleum corporations drivesthe fight on terror. However, Western imperialism is a conclusiveexplanation for the fight on terror and the rising extremist groups.
An over-relianceof imported oil by the US has led to adverse consequences that promptthe country to protect its interests abroad, especially, in theMiddle East. Intertwining the country`s energy and political policieshave been one of the major factors that have led to increased terror.The US made some agreements in the past with the Middle Eastcountries (Saudi Arabia) to protect them from external aggressions aslong as enjoy an endless supply of their oil reserves. The resultanteffect has been the loss of lives of the American soldiers as theyseek to protect their economic interests in the Arabian countries.
This film failsto address the factor of western imperialism, and how it has led tothe rise of numerous terror associations. According to Walzer (2015),the influence of the US in the Middle East, such as the attack onIraq, led to the creation of extremist groups, such as the IslamicState. This economic and cultural dominance over other countriesplays a larger role in the fight on terror than the need to protectoil reserves (Walzer, 2015). It is, nonetheless, prudent tounderstand that the exploitation of oil reserves in the Middle Eastby the US is one example of western imperialism.
Desoto espousesfor institutional liberalism where institutions, such as the marketand the state (private individuals and the government) have propertyrights that are not limited by any other organization. Under thisapproach, people across the universe should have the rights to ownproperty as they wish as that is the best economic model to promotegrowth. Nevertheless, as much as it is seen as the perfect model toreduce the financial gap among individuals, it has been unable toyield positive results in most of the countries in the world (Perez,2011).
The US is theonly country in the world where this economic model has workedperfectly to foster economic growth. The success of therepresentation, in the nation, arises from an educated population anda longer period of upholding this right. Another key factor thatinfluences Desoto`s approach is the fact that most of the statesacross the world, even those societies thought to be at their primalstages such as those in Africa or Asia, have embraced property rights(De Soto, n.d). The only reason why these states may not beeconomically successful is that they have only accepted this practicein the recent past. It will thus take more time for them to realize asuccess in applying these models.
According to thisundertake, only capitalist societies should be the most economicallydeveloped in the world. However, the rise of communist nations suchas China and the former Soviet Union contradicts this approach.Russia and China have grown to become one of the most developedsocieties. De Soto (n.d) disputes this argument with the claim thatthese nations were crony capitalists where one needed to appease theruler before they instituted any business.
The Greenwaldfilm shows the concept of war profiteering which is linked to some ofthe fights and conflicts that the US engages in abroad. Warprofiteering is an organization or even private individuals thatprofit from a particular battle either through supplying weapons ornecessary goods to those at battlefield. The combat in Iraq is one ofthe recent conflicts that was only necessary to offer profits tothose companies that gain from these warfare (Hartung, 2016).
The class systemtheory explains some of the fundamental concepts that push a countryto engage in fight. Under this approach, economic power is thesignificant aspect that motivates both politics. It is thus importantto acknowledge that political power and military dominance is aconsequence of the financial strength of the higher economic classes.Hartung (2016) argues that the arms business is one of the mostregulated and profitable firms in the US where a few companies areallowed to sell their wares to other states. Furthermore, the mediadoes not report the revenues from businesses with operations in thisindustry.
Another conceptin the theory is that the advanced nations dominate and exploit otherweak countries. The US, with its technological advancements andmilitary might, can exploit countries such as Iraq for their economicresources such as oil. One of the major critics of the class systemtheory is that it is mostly propagated by the less developingcountries who have failed to develop economically. Other countrieshave been able to grow their economies despite the adversities theyhave faced in the past. International relations have also changed,and countries are less likely to use these methods in the modernworld.
De Soto, H. (n.d). Rethinking Liberalism: An Interview withHernando de Soto. HeinOnline
Hartung, W. (2016). There’s No Business Like the Arms Business,Common dreams. Accessed fromhttp://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/07/26/theres-no-business-arms-business.
Perez, A. (2011). Yet Another Path: Another Path: Expanding DeSoto`s Framework Using Ostrom`s Insights. The Annual Proceedingsof the Wealth and Well-Being of Nations, 2012.
Walzer, M. (2015). Islamism and the Left. Dissent, 62(1),107-117.