Since 9-11, many commentators have asked question: can the West can really ever be at peace with Islam? If the cooperative spirit of the market economy prevails, the answer is yes. An example is Malaysia, which defies the stereotype. It shows what peace is possible when governments permit market exchange and freedom of cultural contact, while avoiding imperial overreach and belligerence.
The critics of free trade persist in their insistence that permitting individuals in this country the freedom to invest where they please undermines the effectiveness of the U.S. economy and ultimately leads to a lower standard of living. The implication: Americans are better off only if everyone else in the world is poor. This flies in the face of sound economics.
The historical record shows that commercial freedom is the best policy in peace and war. Cooperation is more fruitful than coercion. And if one wants the friendship or assistance of others it is better to appeal to their interests instead of their fears. Above all, foreign trade should be as free and unrestricted as trade within a nation.
Those of us who know some economics are used to wincing when the typical clergyman makes a pronouncement on political economy. So it comes as a bit of a shock to read Late Medieval religious figures, avowedly concerned with justice and morality, and find that not only are they economically literate but that in many cases their economic theory was far more advanced than many professional economists who came after them.
A broader understanding of "Say's Law" would assist those who continued to be puzzled by macroeconomic questions, but even better would be to understand the context in which this Law was formulated. Say not only built a case for the essential stability of a free market (in contrast to the instability of the present mixed economy) but also made the case for the free society against every alternative.
In democratic societies, elected political officials are the final arbiters of the government's marketplace do's and don'ts. Who elects these political officials? Surprise! The same people supposedly incapable of making informed decisions in the marketplace.
Boycotters do not wish to target only business firms; they also are trying to influence the political process by directing political campaigns against people and causes that the pressure groups want to marginalize. William Anderson is fed up.
When impoverished ethnic majorities are empowered by the sudden introduction of full blown democracy, they fall prey with discouraging regularity to demagogues who incite them against the often conspicuous disparity of welfare and privilege between them and the small, exclusive ethnic minorities.
It is always agreeable to be proved right. In an earlier review, I suggested that Thomas Sowell "had a genius for the striking fact and the apt analogy."
The New York Times recently ran a three-part series on a string of tragic industrial accidents at facilities owned by McWane Inc., a large producer of sewer and water pipe based in Alabama. The series describes nine apparently needless and sometimes especially gruesome deaths, as well as several horrendous injuries suffered by workmen. All of them are presented as taking place in an environment of such reckless irresponsibility and callous disregard for the value of human life as to strain credulity.
