OPINIONSrnBuchananism: Two OpinionsrnThe Great Betrayal: How American Sovereigntyrnand Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to thernGods of the Global Economyrnby Patrick J. BuchananrnNew York: Little, Brown;rn376 pp., $22.95rnFree Trade, Free Slavesrnby William R. HawkinsrnThe United States owes its origin tornthe trade wars of early modern Europernbut its success to the Industrial Revoluhon,rnwhich filled America with productive,rnlargely self-sufficient people.rnThe histon,- of the United States is tesfimonyrnthat economic growth has not occurredrnuniformly around the world.rnSome nations and empires have risen,rnsome have fallen; others have done both,rnwhile vet others have stagnated. Comparernthe Pacific Rim with sub-SaharanrnAfrica, or the countries on either side ofrnthe Rio Grande. Not only the prosperityrnbut the security and independence ofrncommunities have depended on theirrnrelationship to a turbulent economicrnworld. This endless struggle is thernsubject of Pat Buchanan’s The GreatrnBetrayal.rnBuchanan’s fide refers to the irresponsiblernmanagement of American policymakersrnwho believe “free trade” will automaticallyrnallocate capital and otherrnresources fairly and efiFiciently across thernglobe. Some commentators embracernWilliam R. Hawkins, a former economicsrnprofessor, is Senior Research Analyst forrnU.S. Representative Duncan Hunterrn(R-CA).rnthis naive nofion with a passion borderingrnon religious idolatry; others employrnfree trade rhetoric as a mask for their pursuitrnof power, while managing trade policyrnto their own benefit. Yet free tradernhas never been very persuasive on itsrnmerits. What Alexander Hamilton wroternover two centuries ago remains true today:rn”There are some who maintain thatrntrade will regulate itself, [but] this is onernof those speculative paradoxes.. . rejectedrnby every man acquainted with commercialrnhistory.” Buchanan traces therneffect of free trade not only on the UnitedrnStates but on Europe and Asia as well.rnThe “invisible hand” does not brandishrnthe flag of any nation in particular; itrnis the responsibility of statesmen to deviserneconomic policies that support nationalrnobjectives against the ambitions ofrnrivals. The abandonment of this dut’ bvrnAmerican policymakers, the switch fromrnprotectionism and internal improvementrnto “free trade” and interdependence,rndoes not proceed solely from thernNew Deal and Franklin Roosevelt’s successors;rnits great impetus has come fromrnthe reorientation of finance and industrialrncapitalism. When corporations werernnational in character, they had a symbioticrnrelationship with government. Generally,rnwhatever produced an increase inrnprivate wealth augmented nationalrnwealth as well. Firms used exports tornsupplement their dominance of thernhome market and directed foreign investmentrnto secure raw materials andrngain access to overseas markets, assuringrnthat trade, indeed, followed the flag. Beginningrnin the 1970’s, however, this systemrnwas altered by the rise of the “globalrnfactory” directed by transnational firmsrnspreading their operations across numerousrncountries: in the new economic era,rnmaximizing a firm’s profits no longerrnmeans maximizing the wealth of anyrnparticular country. These transnationalrncorporations are the power promotingrnthe political shift from “protectionism”rnto “free trade”; they have even abandonedrnsuch words as “trade” and “exports”rnand speak instead of “integration,”rnimplicitly rejecting the notion of separaternnational economies. Walter Wriston,rnformer chairman of Citicorp Bank,rnhas argued that since business no longerrnrespects territory, sovereignty is of diminishingrnvalue. Buchanan quotes fromrnWriston’s book The Twilight of Sovereignty:rn”When a system of nationalrn)ULY 1998/29rnrnrn