Overall

I seek to create a whole new field, what I call "Peace Economics" in the interdisciplinary field of peace studies based on fields largely alien to social sciences and humanities.  "Peace Economics" is based on the STEM fields (science technology engineering and math), plus business, accounting, politics, and military science.

Social Sciences and Humanities vs STEM Fields

My 2009 dissertation showed that of the 32 peace studies programs responding to my survey (80% response by the 40 active programs in my survey data set) all the directors answering the survey came from either the social sciences or humanities, none from STEM or business, economics, accounting, military science, or climate science.  By contrast, except for politics, my nine basic fields that each lead to "Peace Economics" are all from science, engineering, math, business, economics, accounting, climate science, and military science.  Only my political background is comparable to the top choice of political science among 28% of peace studies directors.

The 32 directors were in order of most to least, 9 political science, 5 theology or religion, 4 philosophy, 3 sociology, 2 history, 2 language, anthropology, law, communication, conflict transformation, mediation, psychology, and peace studies. Those programs headed by philosophy and psychology seem to have the greatest aversion to peace economics.  How my nine fields lead to Peace Economics: https://bobreuschlein.wordpress.com/2019/06/26/because-of-the-nine-fields/

Nature of Economics in Peace Studies

While the field of peace studies has many socialists and those with anti-business attitudes, an understanding of business is basic to any large picture approach to the theory of peace economics and society in general.  Economics courses in peace studies were mostly traditional, optional, and rarely required.  27 programs responded to my dissertation survey of economics taught in the program.  The traditional economics:  13 programs had International Economics courses, 12 Political Economy, 10 Macro Economics, 9 Economic Development, 8 Trade Economics, 5 Environment Economics, 3 Labor Economics, 2 Ethics and Discrimination Economics.  The specialty economics courses:  4 Climate Change Economics, 3 War and Peace Economics, 3 Peace and Development Economics, 3 Economic Inequality Crime Social Problems, 2 Economic Growth, War, and Depression, 1 Military Industrial Complex Economics, 1 Rise and Fall of Empire Economics, 0 Military Spending Economics and Growth, 0 Defense Economics, 0 Regional Economics of Military Spending, 0 Fifty Four Year Cycle Kondratiev Wave.  These last eight underlined topics are underappreciated Reuschlein specialties, all notably under-represented and the last four are very important with no courses and only a few days spent teaching in a few programs at best. The paradigm shifting accurate models I have developed in military empire macro-economic theory and climate economic war cycle theory radically improve how many of these topics can be better viewed and taught.

Business Studies

Most business studies programs have two approaches to business management, one is behavioral and the other is structural.  Peace studies is very heavy on behavioral and light on structural.  Personal experience confirms my MBA professor's opinion that structural had the most explanatory power.  My first job after the MBA I had two different secretaries, one an extrovert and one an introvert.  Yet they both raised the exact same structural issues of difficulty between my job and theirs.  Likewise I believe my structural approach to military economics and the climate war cycle can lead to great understandings and benefits to peace studies. 

Nobel Peace Prize Nomination Reaction

When someone on this list does well, they should be congratulated and encouraged, not jeered at like I was.  Thomas Kuhn's "Structure of a Scientific Revolution" points out how the road to change is paved with such pitfalls, but it is sometimes shameful the way I have been treated on this list-serve.  I should be welcomed and invited to keynote conferences, not disdained.  What is wrong with sharing my success in getting the Norwegian Nobel Committee to pay increasing attention to my work?  Why is that not considered important on this list-serve?  Scientists like Einstein and Hawking can also contribute greatly to peace.  Suggesting I should cut my contributions of under 30 per year down to 2 a year is an example of command interference suppression by an insecure leader.  After six years of releases the sudden intolerance is unfair and adversely chosen.

Alternative View Suppression

Baseless claims about self-promotion are and were used to justify intimidation against me.  Self-promotion abounds on the discussion list-serve of peace and justice, yet it seems I alone am targeted for using this behavior while others offer workshops and coaching in glossy multiple page newsletters posted whole on this list-serve several times a year.  "Confessions of a Midwest Radical" were posted 37 times in the most recent year, 2016-2017, apparently followed by retirement, more times than any of my last three years.  Many have long lists of links after their names at the end of postings.  Perhaps there is a little ageism and classism involved as well as an inability to appreciate or understand someone with a detailed well researched STEM based new approach to economics and an industrial engineering approach to global warming.  And I haven't made a dime off any of this free detailed contribution.  I have just tried to educate and share wonderful discoveries a little bit at a time, in small enough chunks and in enough detail to be believable.  And for this I get attacked periodically on specious grounds for doing things others may do without comment.  My thanks to the many who have appreciated and used in the classroom my materials. I hope we all can do better in the coming new decade.

Comparison of Peace Economics and Peace Studies:

https://www.academia.edu/5645092/COMPARISON_Peace_Economics_vs._Peace_Studies_1p.14

Please cite this work as follows:  Reuschlein, Robert. (2019, December 24), "Minority View Marginalized" Madison, WI, Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from:  https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Minority-View-Marginalized,2019207081.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute,

Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com

Info: www.realeconomy.com