using Game theory only : Did implementation of economic polices pre 1939 reached a point that the optimal economical benefits would have been maintained/obtained by war? If no what were the game theoretical alternatives?

Has anyone used linear models to analyse the historical outcomes and their game theoretical possible alternatives?

  • Uh, game theory? – Tyler Durden Aug 24 '15 at 3:29
  • @TylerDurden : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory – jimjim Aug 24 '15 at 4:01
  • 1
    How exactly do you intend to apply 'Game theory' in this context? – Servaes Aug 24 '15 at 14:34
  • You want to use a theory, you have to make some assumptions. – jjack Aug 26 '15 at 14:41

I believe you are making a false distinction between pre-1939 and post-1939 expansionism. Game theory assumes that people rationally evaluate the status quo and their next options. There are plenty of examples to show that this isn't the case in real life, from the Ultimatum Game to the Sunk Cost Fallacy.

If governments were using game theory, 1939 would have been too late to break off. While the Munich Agreement might have resulted in temporary Appeasement, Hitler had clearly shown his intentions to revise the post-WWI order. If he didn't occupy the rest of Europe, Germany was to small to prevail against the rest of Europe. If he occupied the rest of Europe, the United States would be forced to take actions.

  • Holy hell, so they knew in advance that US will counter that move and yet went ahead with it! Was the entire war results of will of one man? Or was there other benefactors that used Hitler as their puppet? – jimjim Aug 24 '15 at 7:41
  • 2
    @Arjang, I wrote "If governments were using game theory, ..." -- they didn't, and nazis in particular put ideology above reason. They were not the first or last government to do so. – o.m. Aug 24 '15 at 16:56

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.