Four explanations have dominated recent analysis of sources of violent conflict. The first being group motives and group inequali¬ties, which specifically address the ethnic conflicts that have based on recent evidence that there are in decline experts see an immense need to investigate in-depth to the effects of economic and political inequalities contributions to violent conflict . Experts focuses on the theory the “horizontal inequalities” which are solely based on the idea that embedded political and economic differences can cause “deep resentment” resulting in violent conflict.
The second being individual gains from conflict resulting, which specifically that the net benefits of war make them necessary and profitable to fight.. The industrial military complex justifies this theory. The sure number of arms sells for both offensive operations and domestic security are staggering . S&B are quoted as saying “where alternative opportunities are few, because of low incomes and poor employment, and the possibilities of enrichment by war are consid¬erable, wars are likely to be more numerous and last longer.” They simply mean that many States us war to employee an spur economic growth and where poverty is most prevalent wars will last longer and become more frequent.
The third being a failed "social contract" a failed social contract is the mother of revolution. S&B are quoted “people accept state authority as long as the state delivers services and provides reason¬able economic conditions in terms of employ¬ment and incomes.” When the government fails to deliver basic needs of its citizens revolution is and political violence are inevitable. Examples are the French Revolution, Bolshevik Revolution, and the Arab Spring.
The final resulting from the environmental pressures or "green war” or a scarcity of natural resources according to S&B are a major element of violent conflict. S&B highlights 3 major “ environmental scarcities” a. supply induced scarcity due to depletion b. demand induced scarcity which S&B has established is directly connected to population growth, and c. structural induced scarcity S&B establishes that is a direct result unequal distribution of natural resources.
United States should make promoting democracy abroad one of its central foreign-policy goals. Democracy is not an unalloyed good and the United States should not blindly attempt to spread democracy to the exclusion of all other goals, but U.S. and global interests would be advanced if the world contained more democracies. It amounts to what might be called an American "liberal" grand strategy. It is a strategy based on the very realistic view that the political character of other states has an enormous impact on the ability of the United States to ensure its security and economic interests.
The real argument of whether or not the promotion of democracy is good, is unanswerable. Political Scientists debate the premise of approach or implementation. Democracy is assumed to be good for the “citizen”. It is also assumed that democracy is good for the international system, as well as U.S. interests and security. External sources and democratic peace propositions argue that the peace between democracies is based on shared democratic norms or political institutions. The relationship of relative peace among democracies is a result of some of the more desirable features of democracy, and it is not caused exclusively by economic or geopolitical characteristics of the state. External sources argue in support of a semi-pluralist and semi-globalist position. Pluralism is created on a different set of assumptions than a realistic form of government. In pluralism, we see that this form uses multiple bodies working cohesively to produce policy rather than one solitary entity. No one body actually rules; yet, they rule by consensus of the cooperative bodies. In globalism, there are three fundamental assumptions. The assumption is that the origins of relations between democratic nations exist only in a global context. Another assumption is all international relations between democratic nations are viewed from an historical context. It is also an assumption is that coalitions between democratic nations focus on the mechanism of domination. When examining exporting democracy, one cannot help but draw the conclusion that organizations, such as the United Nations, World Health Organization, World Trade