THE MANLINESS OF GLOBALIZATION
by Guest Author, William Kephart

This is my first ever guest article here at Arthur’s Hall of Viking Manliness and I hope it will be the first of many. If you frequent the forum on this website you may already know who I am, but for those who do not here is a brief introduction-

I am a philosophy major at Northern Kentucky University, I will be graduating in December 2008 and after that I plan to go to law school. My hobbies are boxing, lifting weights, pipe smoking, and listening to the greatest band ever-Iron Maiden. I am notable at the Arthur's Hall Forums for being something of a leftist who has since reformed a number of his positions on some key issues due to compelling arguments from the other side. One of these issues is one of the most divisive of the modern era - the inevitability of globalization and the forces that have been opposing it.

I wrote this to talk to you about this issue, as it has been pissing me off lately - protectionism, and economic nationalism have been enjoying a wide appeal of late. These two great scourges have come from many places and been propounded by voices on both the right and left (often for disturbingly similar reasons). It is distressing that some have decided to start digging around the tomb of mercantilism and are even making attempts to revive its modern day ancestor-protectionism.

Mercantilism was the economic theory largely accepted in Europe as the old feudal system was being swept away by the advent of the bourgeoisie and establishment of primitive cash economies. To put it simply mercantilism was the belief that wealth is a zero sum game and that trade tends to only fully benefit the party receiving it. This was the beginning of the age of colonization, where the Europeans began to establish colonies and orient their trade to the mother country. However, eventually the unsustainability of this system was exposed when an Englishman named Adam Smith wrote the famous economic treatise The Wealth of Nations which for the first time clearly established the intimate connection between wealth and markets (this was revolutionary because before this time it was generally believed that new wealth could not be created, this was an after effect of the old feudal system where wealth was largely measured in land).

This was not the end of Mercantilism however, in the early nineteenth century American legislators led by Henry Clay developed what came to be known as the American System (incidentally there was very little about it that was American, prominent founding fathers were famous for smuggling in defiance of the mercantilist English Navigation acts that were designed to force Americans to only trade with Great Britain and discouraged trade with other European powers). Essentially the American system was centered around a large protectionist tariff on imported goods with the hopes of protecting infant American industry in New England by discouraging Southerners buying cheaper manufactured goods from England in favor of more expensive American made goods. This had the double effect of encouraging ill discipline, complacency, and inefficiency in American industry (altogether pretty god damn unmanly) and pissing off the south to the point where they eventually seceded from the union (no morons, the civil war was not about slavery).

Now that I have established the foundations and failures of modern economic nationalism I want to tell you a little more about those who favor it and their reasons why.

Anti globalism leftists tend to oppose world wide free trade on the grounds that they believe it depresses wages here in the States. I know more about this because I used to be one of these people. I thought that America without an industrial base and a trade imbalance with China would lead to economic hardship here for the majority of Americans. I was incredibly wrong. The only reason jobs are outsourced is because the cost of labor here is so ridiculously inflated by greedy unions who do not represent the interests of the workers they supposedly serve and a government bent on taxing so-called evil corporations into non existence. The American worker has been coddled too long. You do not deserve to make thirty dollars an hour for unskilled labor. If you want to make money step up to the plate and get training in the fields that this new global economy demands and stop voting for politicians who promise to take care of you to get re-elected, they are lying.

And of course the left wing anti globalists never say a word about what a great boost in the standard of living in third world countries that foreign investment provides (they’re brown so they don’t matter, right?) Neither do they take it to account the massive drop in the cost of manufactured goods that comes with foreign trade that increases the buying power of every consumer. They are too busy rioting at WTO conventions and throwing garbage cans through the windows of the local Starbucks to get back on speaking terms with reality.

In regards to right wing anti globalists they are a little bit smarter, but not by much. Their thesis is quite similar to the one the leftists have but the focus is different. Instead of a desire to protect the workers they have a desire to protect the corporations. These are the kind of people who bail out tanking inefficient companies (Chrysler anyone?) and love to pass out corporate welfare with a zeal only matched by the love liberals posses for hand outs to the inner city. What they fail to understand is that if a corporation is collectively dumb enough to start running a constant loss and is in the early stages of collapsing under its own weight then it deserves to. Globalism is a two way street, you do not get increased markets without increased competition, but this is a good thing.

Competition is one of the manliest words in the English language, it is the basis for society and the reason we enjoy such a high standard of living today. Our ancestors had to compete for what they had, and they won, that is why we are here. In the modern world economic self sufficiency is just not possible. Global free trade is the only way to move forward. What everyone must realize is that those who lose today deserve to lose. It is not American or manly to tolerate a loser. In the current world climate it would be about the dumbest thing possible for America to become insular and isolationist again. Hunkering down and stagnating are the marks of an economy entering into its dying throes.

If we embrace global free trade the potential for profits is endless. It stands to reason that more markets are going to lead to higher gains. Entering in to the system is the only course of action fit for a proper man. What real man ever turned away from some healthy competition? Americans as a people need to stop subsidizing failure or we will entirely deserve the spectacular fall that will inevitably come. This is why globalization is manly, and why we must embrace it.