Economic diplomacy only in the 20th century received its ideological and legal form as the discipline shaping the economic stability of a teritory. I say teritorry intentionally, as states have ceased to exist from a number of perspectives. Correlating economic thoughts impacted evolution of different conciousness’ types and have defined the purpose of mankind in the universe, which was obviously needed.
“By studying the Nature to find a common prairie for all that exists, yet Heraclitus noticed in the 5th century BC that all nature is undergoing constant change; that in the World “everything passes and nothing remains.” Heraclitus thus recognizes the struggle of contradictions with the movable force of every change and development, being the basic setting of dialectics. However, this continuous struggle of opposites does not lead to disorder in the world, but, on the contrary, the opposites in the mutual struggle finally settle and create harmony, harmony (ἁρμονία) 1″.
Modern understanding of science through the theory of Quantum mechanics and physics explains this concept by a deeper theory of contradiction that says that the universe is viewed from the standpoint of the material static accumulation of total changes that lead to a manifestation scientifically determined.
An economy under the influence of capitalism, as a socio-economic set-up, experiences a global transformation; capital intentionally moves into private hands and being enriched with creativity and less bureaucracy, easily creates new markets, products and brands; private funds and individuals are becoming brand owners, and brands are become leading features of the international classification of the performance of the state (territory) economies.
So ex-country capital and economies, led and owned by private individuals now, have become the base of country’s economy and development. Paradox isn’t it?
As a result of the privatization of capital (including countries in transition, where this is particularly important), the trend of economic diplomacy is to protect the interests of individuals or the capital that these individuals possess, as countries do not possess majority of capital any more and have no one to represent. Another paradox again?
Who can guarantee that representatives of governments work for the interest of people as well, as modern practice has shown many times that interests of people and capital owners are opposite.
In one of the next articles, this subject will be thoroughly explained.