Monopoly is the natural form of human social organization.
Within the context of suppliers, a monopoly is called a cartel.
The leader of the cartel — or El Capo del Cartel — is typically charged with setting the cartel’s agenda. As the capo is in the unique position of reacting to events he controls the timing of, the capo is able to hedge his bets much better than others. This allows the capo to reap a disproportionate share of profits from the cartel.
The most dangerous time for a Cartel is during a Power Transition. During a Power Transition, a Lieutenant (or constituent member of) the Cartel perceives itself to be able to challenge the Capio, or, alternatively, the Capo perceives a Lieutenant of being in the position to do so.
Presuming the Capo is competent, the other Lieutenant are steadily rewarded by the Capo. Thus, they have much to lose in a potential change, and little to change. Therefore, during a Power Transition, the majority of Lieutenants can be expected to side with a Capo against the challenging Lieutenant.
Within the context of large states, the following wars were caused by a Power Transition, fought between a challenging Lieutenant against his Capo & his Capo’s Lieutenants.
- The Napoleonic Wars, 1803-1815 (France v. Anglo-Austro-Russian Cartel, unsuccessful)
- The First Germanic Wars, 1864-1871 (Prussia/Germany. v. Austro-Franco-Russian Cartel, partially successful but unresolved)
- The Second Germanic Wars, 1914-1918 (Germany v. Anglo-Franco-Russian Cartel, unsuccessful)
- The Third Germanic Wars, 1936-1945 (Germany v. Anglo-Franco-Russian Cartel, unsuccessful)
- The First Japanese Wars, 1894-1905 (Japan v. Sino-Russo-American Cartel, partially successful but unresolved)
- The Second Japanese Wars, 1933-1945 (Japan v. Sino-Russo-American Cartel, unsuccessful)
The next power transition concerns the United State and China.
Major periods of peace, during which a Power Transition was not seriously threatened, include
- The Anglo-Austro-Russian Cartel (1815-1864, collapsed following successful Prussian/German challenge)
- The Russo-American Cartel (1945-1991, reformed following collapse of Lieutenant position)
- The Euro-Sino-American Cartel (1991-Present, reformed Russo-American Cartel, still extant)
Cartels and Power transitions also occur at the Class level.
For instance, consider the Proletarian class. The ancient population of American blacks have long been consigned to the proletarian classes, for many reasons. While the Proletarian class has rarely been in a position to challenge the Bourgeois in the united States, a Cartel still naturally forms among members of the Proletarian class to determine which group may take the position of Capo del Cartel of the Proletarians.
Here are some famous racial disturbances in the United States, all of which were caused by power transitions in the United States
- New York City Draft Riots, 1863 (Irish v. Anglo-Saxon-led Cartel, unsuccessful)
- Chinese Massacre, 1871 (Anglo-Saxon-led Cartel v. Chinese, successful)
- Watts Riot, 1965 (Blacks v. White-led Cartel, successful)
- Los Angeles Riots, 1992, (Black-led cartel v. Koreans, successful)
The recent violence resulting from the George Zimmerman – Trevyon Martin Incident are clear evidence of another Power Transition, this one featuring a challenging Hispanic population and a Black-led cartel.
Unlike States, peoples are able to transcend their current class through wise moves. As the saying goes, “Life is an IQ test.” This is why power transitions among States are less likely to be successful than power transitions within a class. Additionally, Cartels at the Proletarian level seem more willing to initiate violence than Cartels at the State level.
Historic tensions relating to Irish, Chinese, and Korean proletarians largely ended once those groups began transcending the Proletariat and joined the Bourgeoisie in large numbers.
After a middling number of deaths, Hispanics will likewise transcend the Proletariat.
Thus, while it is a sign of strength for one State to remain a leadership position in the Cartel of nations, it is probably a sign of weakness for one People to remain a leadership position among the Proletariat.