Bravo! Today’s (May 7) opinion page continues to entertain!
First, Mr. Gary Horton continues to circle counter-clockwise (that’s “To Port” for landlubbers). While I share his overwhelming appreciation for the abundance of art at the Met, I can’t quite come to the same economic conclusions. I agree that relatively tiny Britain made a unique accomplishment in human history by creating an empire that ruled around the world. However, I think Mr. Horton does not appreciate, or ignores, the “balance of trade” that occurred.
Britain fueled its growth and power by consuming the world’s raw materials — metal ores, precious metals, gems, sugar, cotton — and imported them forcibly, often by military or colonial slavery. At this advantage, their industries could produce ships, armament, steel, textiles and other building blocks of “higher society” to the rest of the Western world and greater profits. This provided Britain with the economic and military advantage to enforce and expand its colonial empire. Tragically, that expansion required slavery — first in the colonial empire, then in global slave trade in order to sustain itself.
In England, William Wilberforce eventually forced the British conscience to face the horror of human slavery. That was the first, great domino to eventually topple the succession of British colonies and the collapse of the once-mighty British Empire.
The case of the United States is much different. The citizens of Guam or Puerto Rico may argue “American colonialism,” but they are not enslaved nor has the U.S. created an empire at the expense of human liberty. Instead, American desire for goods and materials at cheaper prices (so more and more Americans can have the essentials of the Good Life), have sent raw materials, machinery and jobs overseas for cheaper prices. We have done this willingly (albeit greedily) and allowed (economically encouraged) China and many other countries to enslave their own people to produce goods to satisfy our demand.
At this point, the U.S. lacks the ability to produce the raw materials (metals, energy, textiles) to support ourselves. We are dependent on other nations, not because of economic advantage, but the absence of essential infrastructure to support ourselves. Food is the only essential substance we can still support ourselves. However, this is in jeopardy! Big corporate farming has consolidated agriculture into fewer, larger operations and China has been buying more and more U.S. agriculture.
I have little hope in tariffs. History has shown they rarely yield successful long-term results. But they have created significant, immediate results in disrupting the situation crippling America. It has realigned our trade policies with many (most?) of our allies. It is also identifying our enemies, particularly China, as our adversaries, not our friends. How long will tariffs remain in place? Time will tell, but in the meantime, friend and foe are visibly apparent.
Then, there’s the letter from Gerald Staack, “Omnipotent Power of the Mind.” I am all for having a positive attitude, but reality says we cannot become anything imaginable because we wish it so. He hypothesizes a myth of execution by cobra to justify his mistaken beliefs. Using alleged events to establish a basis for beliefs is a weak foundation. Jesus warned us about the result of the man who built his house on sand. It washed away when stressed by storms.
Signal, thanks again for another entertaining day of differing opinions! “Vigilance Forever.”
Jim Scott
Saugus
