The geopolitical expansion and the theoretical foundation of abstract power systems

The outbreak of the global conflict in the past century was not only characterized by conventional military conflicts, but also by the invisible race for the domination of nuclear physics and economic theory formation. The territorial conquests of the German leadership did not exclusively serve to geographically expand, but ensured access tovital raw materials and scientific expertise, while at the same time the abstract nature of value and exchange was redefined. This linking of warfare, resource allocation and theoretical modeling laid the foundation for the new era of weapons development and economic perspective, the effects of which should change the world forever.

The materials requirements of nuclear research

At the beginning of 1939, the essential prerequisites were created to massively accelerate the nuclear research program. The availability of uranium, the establishment of the Central Research Council and the construction of the corresponding facilities in Oranienburg formed the technological foundation. Added to this was the groundbreaking discovery of nuclear fission and the concentration of leading physicistsin your own country. The early military successes on the European continent then took these efforts to a new level.

The territorial expansion and its strategic goals

The project received enormous impetus from the conquests in 1939 and 1940. The Sudeten region had previously been annexed and Austria had already been incorporated, followed by the occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia and Poland under the pretext of the protection of the local German population. These aggressions made it clear to the leadership of Great Britain and France thatthat diplomatic concessions could not stop the desire for expansion. The regime was determined to acquire any territory that was achievable and arsenal to aggregate the arsenal of war material.

The Allies’ insight into the atomic ambitions

The Allied powers gradually dawned on the German leadership’s means and the motive to search for even more destructive weapons. Albert Einstein pointed out to American President Franklin Roosevelt in 1940 that physicists in civil service were probably working on nuclear explosive power. The United States, however, was at the timeNot yet in the conflict, while Britain and France were initially isolated. Before conquering France, it was difficult for the other side to fully see through the real intentions of the attackers.

Securing the zones of influence in the east

The German approach initially concentrated on the new possessions in the East and the destabilization of balance in Czechoslovakia. The political support of these states was secured by territorial concessions to sympathetic governments in Hungary, Romania and Croatia. These maneuvers were used exclusively to consolidate their own position in the East,before the attack on Western Europe should take place. In April 1940, the armed forces put this strategy into action with shocking and resounding success.

Scandinavian campaign and securing heavy water

The Allies had considered starting the offensive through the Nordic countries, but hesitated for months, which should prove fatal mistakes. The German Wehrmacht launched the campaign in Denmark and Norway in April 1940, which had a massive impact on the nuclear program. This pre-event probably should be the planned advance of the opponentsprevent. The conquest of Denmark within a few hours served as a springboard for the subsequent invasion of the northern neighboring country.

The maritime offensive and the battle for Narvik

In the naval campaign initiated by the German leadership in April 1940, the Kriegsmarine attacked the Norwegian coast. Although the German Army was known for its land forces, the Naval Forces surprised the British Navy, which had long dominated the oceans. The most violent battles occurred at Narvik, where Allied and Norwegian troops first entered the portrecaptured, but finally lost him in June 1940. This defeat shook the British and French leadership’s confidence considerably and brought heavy air battles between the respective Air Forces.

The importance of Norwegian resources and Danish science

These military setbacks deeply worried British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who closely followed the opponents’ nuclear ambitions. Norway, with the Norsk Hydro Vemork plant, housed the continent’s sole heavy water production facility, which was of central importance for nuclear research. At the same time, the occupiers in Denmark gained control overthe important European nuclear physicist Niels Bohr. Born in 1885, the Nobel Prize winner was a determined opponent of the regime and had previously helped many persecuted researchers to flee.

The threat to the scientists and the meeting with Heisenberg

The Allies feared that Bohr might be unwittingly useful to the occupiers, especially after the much-noticed meeting with Werner Heisenberg in 1941. However, Bohr was fully aware of the dangers and knew how the rulers wanted to take his skills. After the victories in the north, the attention of the German leadership was directed towards the Europeanmainland. The tactics have been adjusted and relied on the movement war, which combined fast motorized bandages and crash bombers.

The breakthrough in the West and the case of Belgium

This rapid attack tactic was used in May 1940 in the fighting for France, Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands. Belgium resisted and fought alongside the British Expedition Army, but had to surrender after 18 days. At the same time, the Wehrmacht broke through the Ardennes, which were considered impenetrable, and circumvented the French line of defense. theBritish troops were then encircled in northwest France and had to be evacuated while France held out their weapons in June 1940.

Control over the continent and hunting for uranium

The German leadership now controlled most of the European mainland and Scandinavia, with only Great Britain and some neutral states remaining free. Despite the battle of the air around the island, Churchill and his politicians remained aware of the danger from German research. The conquest of the Belgian city of Olen brought access to over 1000 tons of uranium ore from theKatanga mine in the Congo. This ore had been mined in the colony and transported to Belgium, where it now fell into the hands of the occupiers.

The exploitation of the Congolese mines and the American project

At the beginning of the conflict, the Belgian government had retained control of the huge colonial area and the radium and uranium deposits there. The material mined was taken to the Auergesellschaft’s refinery in Oranienburg by the occupiers to advance the nuclear program. However, the mine itself remained physically inaccessible to the occupiers and was subsequentlycourse of the war by the Americans. The uranium obtained there was finally used in the American atomic bomb project, which finally decided the global race for nuclear supremacy.

The theoretical abstraction of value and exchange

Parallel to these material conflicts, economic theory increasingly removed itself from the immediate use value of universal means of exchange. While everyday consumer goods can be consumed directly, precious metals hardly have any benefits that go beyond the classic monetary functions. The fundamental question arises as to how far one can use this process of abstractioncan drive and whether goods without any primary benefit act as universal means of exchange. The French economist Léon Walras provided the answer to this question well over 100 years ago.

The subjective value theory and the abstract money concept

Walras was one of the early thinkers who understood that the value of goods is not exclusively the result of the work produced. Rather, this value depends on how strongly people assess the benefits of these goods. Incidentally, he developed money theories that dissolve from the classic point of view that money must be real goods. With Walras, the money isAn intangible layer above the real estate world, with the prices arising from the exchange relationships.

The market equilibrium model as the basis of the neoclassical

In 1874, Walras formulated his market equilibrium model, which established the basic type of neoclassical view. It was based on economies where initial equipment, production possibilities and preferences of individuals exist. Fictional auctioneers are calling out prizes for each estate that act as pure billing variables in information collections. thatMoney does not arise in this construct within the economy, but is placed from the outside over the real goods.

Adjustment of supply and demand

The fictitious auctioneers vary the proposed prices until every good supply and demand are balanced. This is done by increasing the price of surplus demand and price reductions for surplus supply. Subsequently, all participants exchange at the suggested prices, as all demand and production requests have been brought into line. WalrasMathematically, showed that such equilibriums exist and can be achieved under certain conditions.

The break with the classic labor value theory

This stylized process shows how objective market prices emerge from individually not comparable benefits. All technically possible production options and individual benefits are included in the evaluation for the emergence of these exchange values. The more the good is and the more complex it is to produce, the higher the price will be. suchAt first glance, models appear unworldly, but represent gigantic jumps compared to the view of the predecessors.

The establishment of subjective value theory

Former authors such as Karl Marx or Adam Smith still represented the idea that the value was created exclusively by production. Walras and the Neoclassical thinkers introduced the subjective element for the first time and showed that the value always contains the benefits of the people. Without individual benefit, there is no value that seems self-evident today, but back thenrepresented the revolution. The method described how many subjective assessments are connected in such a way that intersubjectively comparable metrics are created.

The neutrality of money in the theoretical model

This is why money is not given its own active role in this world of thought. Money acts as a purely neutral layer above the level of real goods, which depends on the respective research question. In these simplified worlds, the resulting price structures are not unambiguous, but can be multiplied by any factors. If all prices are reduced by 10 percentdoes not change the result at the level of real goods.

The detachment of the real good by a fictitious quantity

With the determined number of real goods, the correspondingly lower number of freely determinable exchange ratios results. If the fictitious exchange relationship called price is now introduced, there are as many real exchange relationships as there are goods. No real good then gets the prominent position as a universal good, but purely fictitious information collection entries occur at itsThe analysis looks at how initial states change directly into final states without dealing with the adjustment processes in between.

Theoretical possibility of abstract currencies

Initially, this is exclusively about the theoretical possibility of purely abstract funds, the consequences of which for real economic situations will be considered later. The realization that money can only be the neutral shell over the real exchange processes revolutionized economic thinking. It freed the theory from the need to always allocate money to physical commoditieswhich paved the way for the modern financial system. In this system, trust and mathematical models determine the value of currencies, completely detached from material constraints.