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.
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.