What Is the Most Important Aspect of National Power?

[bmolsson]

Money of course....

Money can't buy love, but it can buy affection and I can't tell the darn difference....

[Papewaio]

Its more like a volume, one thing times another.

Population would be a quantity while other factors would be qualities.

Obviously things like women in the workforce increases a societies population with regards to workforce.

[PanzerJaeger]

This is quickly turning into a boring poll.

Is a strong economy the most important aspect in making a powerful country?

[Papewaio]

What are the fundamentals of a strong economy?

Large population...nope look at Russia, Indonesia and China vs Japan, Sweden, Norway and NZ.

Landmass... nope Australia is the size of Europe but it hardly has the same National Power as the EU.

Diplomatic clout... this is probably more a combination of its population (market to sell to like China's potential), military power (USA), cultural similarities (USA+ AUS + UK) (like stick to gether), economics (USA) (if you can buy/sell things they like).

Military... is a raw form of power but does a large military benefit the people as much as other government offices? A large military drains the economy. Look at what happened to USSR and how it effectively lost the cold war because the economy sank.

[Al Khalifah]

Its a cycle:

-> Strong Economy leads to better Military.
|
| Military leads to stronger diplomatic clout and landmass.
|
| Increased landmass leads to greater population size and more natural resources.
|
|- Greater population size and natural resources lead to a stronger economy.

That's the theory, but other things can always go wrong which ruin the whole plan. Strong regional neighbours can curb the growth of even the most powerful nations. Germany was very strong in the 20th Century but was effectively surrounded by Great Britain, France and Russia. America grew to be very strong because it had very little regional competition. Conquering land doesn't always guarentee more population or natural resources either. It could just be desolate wasteland.

The other factors mentioned are normally effects rather than causes of a nation's power. Population abilities are normally a spin off a stronger economy and can create a minature feedback loop. Civil rights are a spin off of the form of government. The form of government tends to have a bearing on the balance between the build up of economic and military strength. A nation that empowers more of its populace in governance is likely to be weaker militarily than one that keeps tight central control, but is more likely to be able to support a strong economy through the free market.

[Byzantine Prince]

I have to go with population abilities. You can have the worst, most deserted country in the world but with skilled people anything is possible. That is real power. Population size, and even economy size doesn't count for nothing. Germany before WW2 didn't have a bigger economy then the USSR. And earlier then that it wasn't even better. But Germany had very skilled people. Scientists and engineers! The world needs more of them!

[King Edward]

Aircraft carriers..

[mercian billman]

I have to go with population abilities. You can have the worst, most deserted country in the world but with skilled people anything is possible. That is real power. Population size, and even economy size doesn't count for nothing. Germany before WW2 didn't have a bigger economy then the USSR. And earlier then that it wasn't even better. But Germany had very skilled people. Scientists and engineers! The world needs more of them!

I have to agree with BP except I should add that the USSR eventually did defeat Germany, and population size and economy did count for something in that.

I'm torn between the strength of a nations economy and the abilities of it's population. In the end I have to go with a populations abilities because it determines the strength (and type) of economy a nation will have.