The Ideology of Free Trade

Most sociologists,' argues Michael Smith, in an article in the March 1989 issue of this journal, would oppose the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) 'as a matter of course,' because they presume that 'the functioning of markets produces unacceptable levels of inequality'. This position is called 'reflexive opposition,' and the paper then turns to the specific agreement to argue that it would not produce such inequality. The editor has asked for a response. The major protagonists identified by Smith in the debate are political scientists and economists. Cameron, Drache, Panitch, Williams, all political scientists; Levitt, Crispo, Lipsey, Wannacott, all economists on the other side. Of sociologists mentioned in the article, none except Cohen, talking as a trade unionist, has been prominent in the debate, and most have not even engaged in it. The Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association had only one co-sponsored session on the subject at the 1988 annual meetings. One is obliged to admit that sociologists are notable chiefly by their absence, and that is puzzling. Smith notes this, but none the less constructs a version of what sociologists would say if they said anything, and then, toward the end of his paper, shifts his attention to socialists, apparently forgetting sociologists altogether. On entirely impressionistic grounds, I can accept Smith's supposition that many sociologists (some of them not even socialists!) oppose the Agreement. However, I note that as the debate gathered momentum during the election, an increasing number of economists also opposed it. The Economics department at my own university was reported to be evenly split on the subject. What became apparent in this impassioned exercise was that there were numerous and diverse grounds for opposition. Curiously, there seemed to be only one ground for approval, the ground of 'enhanced trading opportunities'. Those approving the FTA kept attacking their opponents along the single dimension that they saw as pertinent. I think Smith also does this. The basic problem here is an apparent inability on the part of proponents t recognize that neither the gutsy opposition nor the Agreement itself is really about trade

Economics · Ideology · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Labor Movements and Unions · Law

• Free trade

  Open Access•Ray Richardson•Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue…•1992

  Add to list