Thinking about the end of the Cold War

I have been reading The Cold War: A New History by John Lewis Gaddis. It occurs to me that there are great historic trends that underlie the Cold War and may have largely determined its outcome.

Capitalist Market Economies versus Communist Command Economies: As Gaddis points out, the American foreign policy after World War II and during the Cold War had the support of economic development in allied or potentially allied nations as a key element. Not only were the United States and its allies very successful in their economic development individually, but the tide of globalization of trade among them stimulated all their growth. The USSR on the other hand not only did not seek to provide financial aid to its satellite states but demanded reparations from conquered Germany and the Community command economies were isolated from the West and fell far behind.

Imperialism versus Nationalism: I would suggest that the fall of imperialism before nationalism was an even greater trend than the fall of communism before capitalism in the second half of the 20th century. The creation of nations out of the former colonies of Britain, France, Portugal, and Russia were all accomplished in a relatively brief period of the century. The nationalism of Germany, Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia were all instrumental in the fall of the Communism, as the nationalism of states held within the USSR under Russian control led to the fall of the USSR.

Schooling and Information Systems: The second half of the 20th century saw an unprecedented increase in education. 6.7 percent of the population of the world now hold college degrees. Rates of literacy, primary school completion and secondary school completion have also increased worldwide. Technological advances have hugely increased the flows of information worldwide, while the economic value of knowledge became more apparent.

Human Rights: While the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizens in France and the Bill of Rights in the United States date from the 18th century, an international concern for human rights got a huge boost with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the UN General Assembly in 1948 and the Human Rights portion of the Helsinki Accords in 1989. In the United States the Civil Rights movement lessened the reality behind charges that America failed to guarantee human rights and people in the Communist countries came to believe that their rights were being infringed upon by their governments.

Participatory Government versus Authoritarian Government: According to the State Department (as of 2008), "(i)n 1974, about 30 countries were considered democratic. Today, more than 115 countries are democracies." The fall of the USSR and Communism were significantly due to a demand for more participatory and less authoritarian government.

I suppose that these trends were interrelated. More schooled people with more information could demand economic opportunities comparable to those in other countries and governments more responsive to their needs comparable to those in other countries. As they became more affluent, they could focus attention more fully on assuring their human rights.

Gaddis focuses on individuals who rose to lead the world out of the status quo of the Cold War: Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Vaclav Havel, Lech Walesa, Deng Xiaoping and Mikhail Gorbachev. It occurs to me that when the underlying conditions are right, leaders willing to challenge the status quo  are more likely to be put forth and chosen to lead; their leadership more likely to be successful.