Bob, do you know of any good sources that go into detail on unfairness and exploitation in the global trade systems? Maybe itās a lot to ask, but ideally Iād want a source that was:
1) Written from a fairly radical, probably therefore socialist, but at any rate, anti-Western capitalist perspective.
2) Actually written to try and persuade someone like me, a fairly economically centrist, broadly pro-market, pro-welfare state social liberal, rather than just assuming a lot of premises that someone like me would disagree with (especially, assuming those premises at crucial points in the argument.)
3) Goes into a fair amount of empirical detail, and is generally scope-sensitive, and able to acknowledge trade-offs (for example, that at least potentially the same development can harm the environment but hurt people, or create both winners and losers in the same developing country.)
4) Is relatively non-technical, so that I can at least get some sense of what itās argument is, despite not having a social science degree.
(Asking partly because my girlfriend is a communist and challenged me to read into this more!)
Maybe nothing meets those requirements (and Iām not saying Iāll only read something that does), itās a fairly demanding list. But I thought it was at least worth asking.
I donāt like commenting on the EA Forum given the karma-systemās distortionary effect, so your chances of getting a response are much higher if you use substack/āreddit/āDM/āemail/āany-other-medium. However, since you addressed me directly Iām not going to be so impolite as to ignore you, so Iāll give it a go.
Unfortunately, Iām not sure I have one that meets all these requirements. I linked Jason Hickelās āThe Divideā, which is probably the closest, but itās been half a decade since I read it. Given that 1: I have trouble remembering what I even had for breakfast, and 2: I donāt even remember if I finished it, I donāt think Iām in a good position to recommend it. I heard that Ha-Joon Changās āBad Samaritansā tried something like what you mentioned, but I havenāt read it. Writing for an antipodal/āhostile audience is quite an unrewarding job (trust me), so I donāt know how many writers youāll find. Iāll keep my eye out for one though.
I also tend to search literature by topic, and not by author-affiliation, so I most often donāt know the political position of the people Iām reading, beyond the vague vibes the text itself is giving off. I know the World Bank did some dodgy shit, which socialists have raked them over the coals over, but Iām not sure if capitalist scholars (today) defend those actions, so Iām not sure if itās a uniquely socialist critique.
I think, given your profile, youāll probably find the arguments centered on western (farming) subsidies the most convincing (some sources linked in the beginning, though sources more to your liking are likely available online), and youāll probably find the arguments centered on āunequal exchangeā the least convincing. (or, well, Open Borders and Climate Injustices are the ones youāll likely find the most convincing, but given that many capitalist scholars also champion those, I think you already believe in those)
But also, Iām not an expert on global trade. The argument for reparations stems more from what happened in history than whatās happening today. Some highly upvoted comments by EAs were defending colonialism (which I know a bit about, so Iāll probably do a post on that at some point), but for global trade Iāve only read a small handful of books and articles on the topic, so Iād have to look into it more.
Bob, do you know of any good sources that go into detail on unfairness and exploitation in the global trade systems? Maybe itās a lot to ask, but ideally Iād want a source that was:
1) Written from a fairly radical, probably therefore socialist, but at any rate, anti-Western capitalist perspective.
2) Actually written to try and persuade someone like me, a fairly economically centrist, broadly pro-market, pro-welfare state social liberal, rather than just assuming a lot of premises that someone like me would disagree with (especially, assuming those premises at crucial points in the argument.)
3) Goes into a fair amount of empirical detail, and is generally scope-sensitive, and able to acknowledge trade-offs (for example, that at least potentially the same development can harm the environment but hurt people, or create both winners and losers in the same developing country.)
4) Is relatively non-technical, so that I can at least get some sense of what itās argument is, despite not having a social science degree.
(Asking partly because my girlfriend is a communist and challenged me to read into this more!)
Maybe nothing meets those requirements (and Iām not saying Iāll only read something that does), itās a fairly demanding list. But I thought it was at least worth asking.
Hi David,
I donāt like commenting on the EA Forum given the karma-systemās distortionary effect, so your chances of getting a response are much higher if you use substack/āreddit/āDM/āemail/āany-other-medium. However, since you addressed me directly Iām not going to be so impolite as to ignore you, so Iāll give it a go.
Unfortunately, Iām not sure I have one that meets all these requirements. I linked Jason Hickelās āThe Divideā, which is probably the closest, but itās been half a decade since I read it. Given that 1: I have trouble remembering what I even had for breakfast, and 2: I donāt even remember if I finished it, I donāt think Iām in a good position to recommend it.
I heard that Ha-Joon Changās āBad Samaritansā tried something like what you mentioned, but I havenāt read it. Writing for an antipodal/āhostile audience is quite an unrewarding job (trust me), so I donāt know how many writers youāll find. Iāll keep my eye out for one though.
I also tend to search literature by topic, and not by author-affiliation, so I most often donāt know the political position of the people Iām reading, beyond the vague vibes the text itself is giving off.
I know the World Bank did some dodgy shit, which socialists have raked them over the coals over, but Iām not sure if capitalist scholars (today) defend those actions, so Iām not sure if itās a uniquely socialist critique.
I think, given your profile, youāll probably find the arguments centered on western (farming) subsidies the most convincing (some sources linked in the beginning, though sources more to your liking are likely available online), and youāll probably find the arguments centered on āunequal exchangeā the least convincing. (or, well, Open Borders and Climate Injustices are the ones youāll likely find the most convincing, but given that many capitalist scholars also champion those, I think you already believe in those)
But also, Iām not an expert on global trade. The argument for reparations stems more from what happened in history than whatās happening today. Some highly upvoted comments by EAs were defending colonialism (which I know a bit about, so Iāll probably do a post on that at some point), but for global trade Iāve only read a small handful of books and articles on the topic, so Iād have to look into it more.
Thanks for responding