Not asking how and why we have so much power is a blindness that I see in the EA movement. This also leads to assumptions that “Free Trade” is good.
OK, so let’s talk about how and why we have so much power. I’ll speak for myself.
The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth were used to establish the religion of Christianity, which was subsequently spread to Armenia via the apostles Jude and Bartholomew and laterGregory the Illuminator. This opened the door to persecution by Armenia’s Zoroastrian suzerains in Sassanid Persia, but the right to practice Christianity would be won (for a time) with the Nvarsak Treaty in 484.
At a similar time Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire and subsequently the European tribes to the north. These tribes became the foundation of modern Europe, inheriting Roman Christian traditions but occupying a more fragmented existence in a geographically divided continent. The competitive pressures of this regional order led to advanced shipbuilding and other technologies, then expeditions to find new trade routes, which then established Western Europe as the center of global wealth and power able to conquer numerous indigenous nations (aided by diseases) and produce a comparably powerful offshoot called the United States. Throughout this time, Europe remained divided, a situation entrenched by the Catholic-Protestant split in Christianity which forced the pluralist Peace of Westphalia.
This divided Europe relied on a carefully managed balance of power, but German reunification and industrialization threatened to overturn it. European pluralism also laid the seeds for nationalism in Austria-Hungary. These pressures collided to create World War One.
By this time, Armenia was still under foreign religiously-motivated oppression, now by the Muslim Ottomans. The situation of WWI stirred Armenian aspirations towards independence, provoked fear among the Ottomans, and sapped Russia’s will to intervene. The result was a genocide of the Armenians and diaspora of the survivors. Some of the survivors made it to Romania, one of the poorest countries of Europe, which was forced into the Soviet bloc as an indirect consequence of the failure of the Western Allies to satisfactorily handle Germany after the conclusion of WWI. Communist policies in Romania sustained a high level of poverty and oppression compared to America, which had profited immensely off its natural resource endowment, geographical location, and sociopolitical heritage (which in turn allowed it to successively defeat the Native Americans, Mexicans, Spanish, Germans and Japanese and then establish its preferred international political and economic order).
A combination of bribes and luck enabled a few of the Armenian Romanians to emigrate to Beirut and then on to 1970s urban America, where men could obtain high salaries in engineering and women could obtain gainful employment in administration and teaching, so that I could then be raised in a stable, upper middle class household with access to a variety of business, political and educational institutions, as the American economy continuously boomed. Also, I won out a bit on the genetic lottery.
Now it’s strange to me that anyone would presume that I wouldn’t be interested in knowing or talking about this history, because it (like most histories) is a fascinating history and of course I love to talk and read all its brutal and inspiring truths.
But I really don’t see its place in Effective Altruism, because for all its ups and downs, it doesn’t tell me what to do now. I’m not going to give money to the Native Americans just as I’m not going to demand money from Turkey. I’m going to give money to Malaria Consortium or the Sentience Institute or MIRI, and I’d ask Turks to do the same, because that’s what works best. So what if our situation was caused by injustice? And I don’t support free trade because I think it worked with slaves or opium, I support it because I think it works now, according to the best economic evidence that we have.
Thanks for sharing your story. I am short of time and keeping this brief.
And I don’t support free trade because I think it worked with slaves or opium, I support it because I think it works now, according to the best economic evidence that we have.
Thats an understandable position. I am skeptical of Free Trade because it was used to justify Slave trade and opium trade. Why should I assume that this time is different?
To take a more contemporary example: “IP” is a restriction on Trade, yet the same people who are for “Free Trade” are for “IP” more correctly called “Intellectual Monopolies”. Read Against Intellectual Monopoly
Wikipedia, Linux are perfect examples of lack of monopolies in knowledge. And can be traded freely, the positive welfare effects are enormous.
The foundation of free trade is that it is mutually beneficial, since both parties agree to it.
With slavery, the slaves did not agree to be enslaved and transported. The enslavers used force and this allowed them to make other people worse off. Today, traded goods don’t include forced laborers, though you could include livestock in this category and I would actually be in favor of restricting that.
With opium, the story was more complicated. Users wanted opium, but it’s an addictive drug that damaged them and Chinese society in the long run. So the Chinese tried to restrict its import, but the British forcibly compelled them to lift the restrictions. Today, we don’t try to use military force to get other countries to accept harmful goods. We do exercise some leverage where we offer trade and finance deals to developing countries in exchange for them changing some of their economic policies; there is debate over this practice with some people arguing that we shouldn’t have these strings attached, but the countries are still willingly taking these deals so they are better than nothing.
I think you may find pro-free-trade people in favor of IP reform, these are rather separate issues. However I kind of doubt that many people of any stripe would want to remove IP rights entirely—that would eliminate the incentive to pursue research and development.
I think you may find pro-free-trade people in favor of IP reform, these are rather separate issues.
Intellectual Monopolies are restrictions on Trade, when trade hurts profitability of the powers that be, they see are happy to support monopoly and see no contradiction.
When human rights are affected negatively by trade (slave trade, colonialism/capitalism, opium war), trade takes first place if necessary by force.
the countries are still willingly taking these deals so they are better than nothing.
Kings lasted thousands of years, Communism lasted for 50+ years (depending on region), colonialism lasted 400+ years. Slavery is thousands of years old. Just because something exists does not mean it is good for humanity. Nor does it mean consent. People try to survive as best as they can given their circumstances.
(warning: longpost)
OK, so let’s talk about how and why we have so much power. I’ll speak for myself.
The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth were used to establish the religion of Christianity, which was subsequently spread to Armenia via the apostles Jude and Bartholomew and later Gregory the Illuminator. This opened the door to persecution by Armenia’s Zoroastrian suzerains in Sassanid Persia, but the right to practice Christianity would be won (for a time) with the Nvarsak Treaty in 484.
At a similar time Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire and subsequently the European tribes to the north. These tribes became the foundation of modern Europe, inheriting Roman Christian traditions but occupying a more fragmented existence in a geographically divided continent. The competitive pressures of this regional order led to advanced shipbuilding and other technologies, then expeditions to find new trade routes, which then established Western Europe as the center of global wealth and power able to conquer numerous indigenous nations (aided by diseases) and produce a comparably powerful offshoot called the United States. Throughout this time, Europe remained divided, a situation entrenched by the Catholic-Protestant split in Christianity which forced the pluralist Peace of Westphalia.
This divided Europe relied on a carefully managed balance of power, but German reunification and industrialization threatened to overturn it. European pluralism also laid the seeds for nationalism in Austria-Hungary. These pressures collided to create World War One.
By this time, Armenia was still under foreign religiously-motivated oppression, now by the Muslim Ottomans. The situation of WWI stirred Armenian aspirations towards independence, provoked fear among the Ottomans, and sapped Russia’s will to intervene. The result was a genocide of the Armenians and diaspora of the survivors. Some of the survivors made it to Romania, one of the poorest countries of Europe, which was forced into the Soviet bloc as an indirect consequence of the failure of the Western Allies to satisfactorily handle Germany after the conclusion of WWI. Communist policies in Romania sustained a high level of poverty and oppression compared to America, which had profited immensely off its natural resource endowment, geographical location, and sociopolitical heritage (which in turn allowed it to successively defeat the Native Americans, Mexicans, Spanish, Germans and Japanese and then establish its preferred international political and economic order).
A combination of bribes and luck enabled a few of the Armenian Romanians to emigrate to Beirut and then on to 1970s urban America, where men could obtain high salaries in engineering and women could obtain gainful employment in administration and teaching, so that I could then be raised in a stable, upper middle class household with access to a variety of business, political and educational institutions, as the American economy continuously boomed. Also, I won out a bit on the genetic lottery.
Now it’s strange to me that anyone would presume that I wouldn’t be interested in knowing or talking about this history, because it (like most histories) is a fascinating history and of course I love to talk and read all its brutal and inspiring truths.
But I really don’t see its place in Effective Altruism, because for all its ups and downs, it doesn’t tell me what to do now. I’m not going to give money to the Native Americans just as I’m not going to demand money from Turkey. I’m going to give money to Malaria Consortium or the Sentience Institute or MIRI, and I’d ask Turks to do the same, because that’s what works best. So what if our situation was caused by injustice? And I don’t support free trade because I think it worked with slaves or opium, I support it because I think it works now, according to the best economic evidence that we have.
Thanks for sharing your story. I am short of time and keeping this brief.
Thats an understandable position. I am skeptical of Free Trade because it was used to justify Slave trade and opium trade. Why should I assume that this time is different?
To take a more contemporary example: “IP” is a restriction on Trade, yet the same people who are for “Free Trade” are for “IP” more correctly called “Intellectual Monopolies”. Read Against Intellectual Monopoly
Wikipedia, Linux are perfect examples of lack of monopolies in knowledge. And can be traded freely, the positive welfare effects are enormous.
The foundation of free trade is that it is mutually beneficial, since both parties agree to it.
With slavery, the slaves did not agree to be enslaved and transported. The enslavers used force and this allowed them to make other people worse off. Today, traded goods don’t include forced laborers, though you could include livestock in this category and I would actually be in favor of restricting that.
With opium, the story was more complicated. Users wanted opium, but it’s an addictive drug that damaged them and Chinese society in the long run. So the Chinese tried to restrict its import, but the British forcibly compelled them to lift the restrictions. Today, we don’t try to use military force to get other countries to accept harmful goods. We do exercise some leverage where we offer trade and finance deals to developing countries in exchange for them changing some of their economic policies; there is debate over this practice with some people arguing that we shouldn’t have these strings attached, but the countries are still willingly taking these deals so they are better than nothing.
I think you may find pro-free-trade people in favor of IP reform, these are rather separate issues. However I kind of doubt that many people of any stripe would want to remove IP rights entirely—that would eliminate the incentive to pursue research and development.
Intellectual Monopolies are restrictions on Trade, when trade hurts profitability of the powers that be, they see are happy to support monopoly and see no contradiction.
When human rights are affected negatively by trade (slave trade, colonialism/capitalism, opium war), trade takes first place if necessary by force.
Kings lasted thousands of years, Communism lasted for 50+ years (depending on region), colonialism lasted 400+ years. Slavery is thousands of years old. Just because something exists does not mean it is good for humanity. Nor does it mean consent. People try to survive as best as they can given their circumstances.