Talk:Autarky

Autarky ???
I've noticed errors on this page several times over the years - fixed them a few times even.

Now the page is more convoluted and nonsense than it was previously. This is not the only page this is happening on - it appears to be a concerted effort to mislead.

Autarky failed in a pre-globalized world, very conclusively and could only do more harm in the world today.

This is not debatable. I will be redoing most of this page.

My apologies if I'm stepping on toes but I find this particular idea dangerous without context.

- Jakksen Notarky (talk) 18:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Of course you are wlecome to edit; however, please be careful about WP:VNT. You seem to have made some pretty strong claims - that Autarky has "very conclusively" failed - without resorting to any sort of scholarly consensus. I am not saying that such consensus does not exist, I am not well educated on this subject; but you need to bring reliable, non-fringe sources to the table if you're changing a Wikipedia article like this. Uness232 (talk) 14:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you the person who wrote sweeping generalisations such as "Economists are generally supportive of free trade." and cite only a former director of the World Bank to justify that claim? You couldn't find three organisations more dedicated to US hegemony than the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO.
 * it's a logical fallacy to say "this idea has always failed, therefore the idea is stupid". human powered flight failed for centuries before it became a reality. and who is measuring the failure, and were the causes of the failure endogenous and exogenous to autarky. A country like bhutan is an autarky. Cuba had had autarky forced on it with USA sanctions (and recriminations against other nations that don't mirror these sanctions).
 * Then we need to examine the phrase "free trade"… the word free is a misnomer and extremely ideologically. As prize winning economist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ha-Joon_Chang points out in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Samaritans:_The_Myth_of_Free_Trade_and_the_Secret_History_of_Capitalism all wealthy nations have used trade barriers (and often colonialism) at one time or another to increase their domestic capacity to compete with important. I could go on and on, but your comments are extremely ideological and this page comes across as something published by the IMF or Radio USA propaganda. WideEyedPupil (talk) 12:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not logged in but I'm Jakksen.
 * I did not write anything regarding economists.
 * I'm just someone who is annoyed that an economic policy is pitched as a "characteristic" that's how it was changed the last time I freaked on the word quality.
 * That lie is the first sentence.
 * There is a concerted effort to change the definition of this word - it's wrong tho and I don't understand how this is contentious at all. 107.77.206.115 (talk) 00:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC)