United States Trade Policy
Joseph Dana Miller
[Reprinted from Land and Freedom,
January-February 1939]
| Joseph Dana Miller was during this period
Editor of Land and Freedom. Many of the editorials
published were unsigned. It is therefore possible that Miller was
not the author of this article, although the content is thought to
be consistent with his own perspectives as Editor. |
Some surprise has been expressed at the appointment of Harry Hopkins
to the post of Secretary of Commerce, for it does not appear that he
has had experience in business, nor has ever been anything of a
student of commerce. The point is not well taken. Knowing nothing
about business he will make an ideal Secretary of Commerce under the
new interpretation of the laws governing business, which is the
production and distribution of wealth.
When a man enters business he finds, no matter what business it is,
that there are lots he did not know about it. He finds what are
sometimes called the laws of political economy which he had never
heard of before. He usually pays so little attention to these laws
that he winds up in bankruptcy. Sometimes, most frequently indeed, his
failure is due to circumstances over which he has no control. There
come business depressions, and these are attributed for the most part
to divine visitations or the blunders of the other political party.
Get rid of the party and things will be on the upturn again.
In the situation as it exists today the appointment of Harry Hopkins
is ideal. We are positive that he does not believe that there are any
laws of business, that he entertains the same views that his chief
does, namely, that the laws of political economy vary with each
decade. Roosevelt has told us in so many words that he has observed
the changing teachings of what certain deluded people call the "science
of political economy." The laws of political economy are what is
taught from time to time in the class room, and are constantly
changing. There are no fundamental principles.
We need therefore feel no surprise that the newly created Secretary
of Commerce has had no experience in business or commerce. It is due
to the absence of experience that the appointment seems to us a
peculiarly appropriate one. As there are no fundamental principles,
nor even well trodden paths to be pursued, here is a tabula rasa for
the new secretary to experiment with. That is as it should be if the
new theory is to be followed that the only laws governing the
production of wealth and its distribution are those to be determined
by experimentation at the hands of Brothers Roosevelt, Ickes, Hopkins,
Frankfurter, Wallace, et al.
When the world was planned, which was some time ago, provision was
made for the needs of mankind. The plan appears to have been the
satisfaction of human desires by the application of labor to land.
This appeared to be so obvious that little attention is given in the
Scriptures or the religions of the world. The method of making a
living seemed so plain that any mention of the method by the Original
Planner seemed quite unnecessary. Here was a world rich in natural
resources. Merely to scratch the surface was to provide wealth in
abundance.
Perhaps it was not foreseen that stupid laws and the greed of man
might set at naught the beneficence of the plan. Instead of relying
upon the simplicity of the plan man at once began to substitute
cumbersome and complicated planning for the simplicity of natural
laws. A few long range thinkers sought to arrest this tendency by
citing natural laws and their simplicity. Among these more enlightened
pathfinders were Turgot, Patrick Edward Dove, Cobden, and a few of the
poets. But nothing was done about it by the lawmakers. These are the
last to learn anything. Even the professors in our universities were a
little ahead of them. Most all of them were free traders, though they
did not understand all that was involved in free trade.
There is no such passionate adherence to the doctrine of protection
as there once was. Perhaps subconsciously the masses of the people who
are not converted by argument are partially impressed with facts such
as the period of depression through which we are passing if we are to
pass. We owe Secretary Hull a debt of gratitude for his reciprocity
treaties. It seems a rather roundabout way to accomplish a purpose,
namely, that we shall cease taxing ourselves when other nations cease
taxing themselves. But Secretary Hull has at least made it clear that
trade involves reciprocity and connotes a two-way traffic. It may be
that through several doors the protective tariff is on its way out.
|