cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/46788659
Looking at how much conflict natural resource-rich countries (oil, gold, diamonds…) seem to attract, I wonder whether such wealth is more a curse than a blessing.
Many regions with scarce natural resources, adapted & perform very well. Some of the richest are examples (Switzerland, Luxembourg, Singapore…)
Looks to me like the greed for them attracts conflicts: civil wars, invasions etc. Cultural, ethnic, religious reasons often just seem to be used to cover it.
Plus all the environmental destruction / pollution that come with the extraction & processing.
You must log in or # to comment.
Some countries do well with it, like Norway. The probabilities aren’t looking good for these types of resources, though.
On the other hand, arable land and forest is harder to control by just a few people and thus usually a net positive for the population.
That is true! I do however suspect that it might be because the oil & gas in Norway is below the sea, which makes it complicated to extract. Therefore also making it hard to control & steal, which also makes it an unattractive target I guess.
You might be right about land, apparently wood is even one of the rarest materials in the universe: https://www.chemistryspace.com/2025/11/rarest-material-in-universe.html
Therefore also making it hard to control & steal
Eh. I suppose it made Norway exploit it later than other countries that had easily accessible oilfields, which gave them the opportunity to develop a more egalitarian society before the influx of fossil fuel money. But if you wanted to sieze these nowadays, it’s arguably easier for the types of countries who might attempt it - on land, you can defend by tank and artillery and the terrain is difficult to reach as long as Sweden and Finland are allied with Norway, while on the sea you just need to send an aircraft carrier and take a couple of exposed spots in the sea and at the coast.
