Rating: 
Summary: An clear look at international trade
Review: "The Great Betrayal" was written by an intellectual sojourner - a man who believed and preached free trade for the bulk of his life but has now changed his mind. Even if you've read and studied economics for years, it's hard to find anyone who challenges the orthodoxy of the free-trade movement as well as Patrick Buchanan. Many who are firmly in the economic camp of international free trade may find that they've only heard one side of the story from our media, government, and schools when they read this book. Personally, this book has changed my mind on global free trade - quite unexpected for what started out as a casual read.The discussion of the Halley-Smoot Tariff Act was the highlight of the book - one can recall the propaganda of high school history texts, and this is brutally exposed with gentle humor - Buchanan's quote from the movie "Farris Bueller's Day Off" (anyone-anyone?) highlighted this well and had me howling with laughter to boot. All but the most bias will be shaking their heads at how quick we are to believe anything if it is just repeated often enough. Read this book. It's entertaining, factual, and honest.
Rating:
Summary: It's Not Too Late to Save Our Economic Wealth, Independence
Review: Buchanan explains how people who used to have manufacturing jobs in America are suffering financially because service jobs don't pay as well as manufacturing ones mainly because of the low profit margin in the service industry. Not all are going to be able to develop the computer skills to participate in the allegedly lucrative computer economy. There is a widening class division between such people and their tech-savvy counterparts who are making a lot more money. Buchanan brings out a lot of stats that show what a bad economic situation we're in, comparing it to the depression, which is a little hard to swallow-but to each his own stats and his interpretation of them. Through free trade, American workers are put into competition with foreign workers who make 50 cents an hour, have no benefits or environmental protection. American corporations have gone global, seeking cheap labor and ever higher profits. They no longer see themselves as American. Buchanan likes history and often has a charming, folksy way of telling stories about historical events to make his points. He says that the founding fathers we're very much trade protectionists and kept their tariffs high to protect their industries and economic independence. Alexander Hamilton was the greatest intellectual founding father of economic nationalism and protectionism through the use of tariffs. Tariffs are also a nifty way of picking up revenue for government operations without having to institute an income tax on the people. As soon as tariffs began to be lowered around 1913, the income tax began, because the government has to get its money somewhere. Buchanan says that Adam Smith was not the free trader that free traders say he was. He says that protectionism of trade did not cause the depression and gives his evidence. Buchanan is against the free traders who have lack loyalty to their nation but whose goal is to have the cheapest products imported by free trade. Free traders think that free trade promotes "WORLD PEACE" and they want to get rid of the nation state and have a global bureacracy take care of us all. They have an almost religious fervor about their free trade dogma and don't like people to say things against it. Buchanan states that having free trade does not make nations more peaceful and shows examples. Besides, nations like China and Japan do not practice free trade but they do take advantage of our free trade policies while they protect their industries and markets from imports. Free trade could be one of the reasons for the decline of the British Empire because they practiced it for so many years. John Maynard Keynes, the famous English economist, was once a avid free trader until he saw what economic damage it was doing to his country. Buchanan suggests raising tariffs to protect our industries, especially our defense industries, so that we can remain economically independent and will be able to keep our military secrets hidden from other countries. Economic independence was one of the reasons the Revolutionary War was fought. Buchanan doesn't want to save the world--he knows it can't be done--he just wants to save American industry, which still can be done if tariffs are raised.
Rating:
Summary: We knew how to do it in the past ...but got led astray.
Review: Buchanan has exposed this modern age version of Free Trade for what it is ,a dumb sellout.A trade means to exchange for something comparable and the West has received nothing beneficial
in return for the loss of industries and jobs that have been moved to countries which use starvation wages and dismal human rights and conditions to produce the goods we have produced for many years.Leaving our workers without jobs and the country losing them as taxpayers.After all this, the goods are sold back here at prices no lower than if they had been made here.The idea that this would benefit the workers in these third world countries has been a fraud as the benefits have never been allowed to trickle down.
Free trade has been a monumental failure ,or as Buchanan claims a Betrayal.
The problem with what is going on now is that two Maxims are being ignored:
First;you should never trade for something that you've already got.
and
Second;You can't continue to trade with someone who has a lower standard of living than you have.It will only keep his low or bring yours down.
Rating: 
Summary: Solid, but not profound, defense of protectionism
Review: Buchanan's book is a solid though not particularly profound or penetrating defense of protectionism The main thrust of Buchanan's argument is fairly simple. When the United States followed an unapologetically protectionist policy during the nineteenth century, the U.S. economy grew by leaps and bounds. But when the U.S began following a more liberal trade policy, the economy began to decline, especially within the manufacturing, heavy-industry sectors. Buchanan believes that a return to a more protectionist policy would reinvigorate the American economy. Is Buchanan right? To a large degree. He is mostly right historically. Protectionism did accelerate the growth of the nation's industrial economy. Whether it can help the economy as it stands today is a more difficult question. Economists would have to develop a better understanding of all the economic and social ramifications of protectionism policy. Buchanan is correct in castigating the economic profession for its dogmatic views about free trade. But he has not exactly developed a convincing economic theory to explain why protectionism worked in the past. (He also, incidentally, erroneously tries to defend the protectionism of the twenties and thirties -- the one time in American history when protectionism made no sense.) I admit to finding it hard to regard protectionism as some sort of panacea. At the same time, it is clear that free trade is no panacea either, that both policies have clear problems and difficulties. The fact remains that most arguments either for or against protectionism are not terribly convincing. The subject is not well understood, largely because the issue confuses moral problems with purely practical problems. Protectionism is a form of spoliation: it is the plunder of consumers on the behalf of specially favored producers. However, merely because protectionism involves what many economists regard as an immoral practice does not mean that it provides no real social utility. Protectionism can make it easier for producers to amass capital (usually a good thing) and it provides a less uncertain environment for investors and entrepreneurs (also a good thing). Moreover, it is critical that a nation protects its capital. The tendency for corporations in the U.S. to export capital abroad in order to take advantage of cheap labor is a very ominous development, and will lead to the decline of America if something is not done to limit or put a stop to it.
Rating:
Summary: Solid, but not profound, defense of protectionism
Review: Buchanan's book is a solid though not particularly profound or penetrating defense of protectionism The main thrust of Buchanan's argument is fairly simple. When the United States followed an unapologetically protectionist policy during the nineteenth century, the U.S. economy grew by leaps and bounds. But when the U.S began following a more liberal trade policy, the economy began to decline, especially within the manufacturing, heavy-industry sectors. Buchanan believes that a return to a more protectionist policy would reinvigorate the American economy. Is Buchanan right? To a large degree. He is mostly right historically. Protectionism did accelerate the growth of the nation's industrial economy. Whether it can help the economy as it stands today is a more difficult question. Economists would have to develop a better understanding of all the economic and social ramifications of protectionism policy. Buchanan is correct in castigating the economic profession for its dogmatic views about free trade. But he has not exactly developed a convincing economic theory to explain why protectionism worked in the past. (He also, incidentally, erroneously tries to defend the protectionism of the twenties and thirties -- the one time in American history when protectionism made no sense.) I admit to finding it hard to regard protectionism as some sort of panacea. At the same time, it is clear that free trade is no panacea either, that both policies have clear problems and difficulties. The fact remains that most arguments either for or against protectionism are not terribly convincing. The subject is not well understood, largely because the issue confuses moral problems with purely practical problems. Protectionism is a form of spoliation: it is the plunder of consumers on the behalf of specially favored producers. However, merely because protectionism involves what many economists regard as an immoral practice does not mean that it provides no real social utility. Protectionism can make it easier for producers to amass capital (usually a good thing) and it provides a less uncertain environment for investors and entrepreneurs (also a good thing). Moreover, it is critical that a nation protects its capital. The tendency for corporations in the U.S. to export capital abroad in order to take advantage of cheap labor is a very ominous development, and will lead to the decline of America if something is not done to limit or put a stop to it.
Rating:
Summary: Great rhetoric exposing the historical view of Protectionism
Review: I enjoyed this book from a historical perspective, but it was not a quantitative analysis of international trade. I see many who gave this book a poor review expected this. Buchanan does not go over the fallacies in models of international trade, or argue against the economic pundits. Rather he gives examples from history and shows how there is a correlation between protection of industry and national growth. He focuses on how this is in the national interest with examples as well.
It has to be obvious to people that outsourcing industry to other countries costs the US jobs. Buchanan hearkens on this point. He breifly mentions the leading economic thoughts regarding how these lost jobs are 'supposed' to be replaced. But again this is NOT an economic treatise. Do not expect him to talk about the theories of Samuelson or Ohlin.
As someone who is not a free trader ( as I find many of the parameters underlying free trade advantages to be weak and not static ), I found that at least a book was written for the common man to understand his choices, which he should control as part of a republic. Its not like there are too many economists tauting this view, and both sides of any argument should be presented.
Rating:
Summary: Great rhetoric exposing the historical view of Protectionism
Review: I enjoyed this book from a historical perspective, but it was not a quantitative analysis of international trade. I see many who gave this book a poor review expected this. Buchanan does not go over the fallacies in models of international trade, or argue against the economic pundits. Rather he gives examples from history and shows how there is a correlation between protection of industry and national growth. He focuses on how this is in the national interest with examples as well.
It has to be obvious to people that outsourcing industry to other countries costs the US jobs. Buchanan hearkens on this point. He breifly mentions the leading economic thoughts regarding how these lost jobs are 'supposed' to be replaced. But again this is NOT an economic treatise. Do not expect him to talk about the theories of Samuelson or Ohlin.
As someone who is not a free trader ( as I find many of the parameters underlying free trade advantages to be weak and not static ), I found that at least a book was written for the common man to understand his choices, which he should control as part of a republic. Its not like there are too many economists tauting this view, and both sides of any argument should be presented.
Rating:
Summary: A Bit Overstated
Review: I have now read two of his campaign books that he used to spell out his agenda when he was running for President. When I first heard about the books I wondered if I could learn anything form them or were they just him ranting on about his ultra conservative ways. Well it turns out that he fills these books up with a great deal of American history on the subject at hand. This book focuses on trade, ok not normally the most thrilling topic, but he does make it interesting. The one concern I have is that is he telling me only the history that suits his basic point? Well if you read the book I do not think this is the case, re represents both the policies that agree with his position and do not agree. Sure he is bias, but overall I think reasonably fair. His basic focus is that the standard of living based on the work the average American does is slipping due to the free trade push that has been happening the last 20 years in America. His argument is that if a business can close its shop in the US and move it to a third world country for a fraction of the employee cost that the people left in the US not only lose a good job that is never coming back but the rest of us lose to because of the reduced tax revenue the government receives from the income tax that worker paid. His solution to this problem is a goods tax on anything made outside the US. A rather article position for a life long conservative. He makes some good points, but I am not well enough versed in global economics to really make a case if he is correct or not. Overall the book is interesting, but can at times be a bit dry.
Rating:
Summary: FREE TRADE EXTREMISTS: READ THE BOOK BEFORE YOU REVIEW IT!
Review: I HAVE READ THIS BOOK--every word. Criticisms by many reviewers here show they didn't read it at all or perhaps only partially. This book brilliantly sheds the shackles of revisionist history and documents the successes of economic protectionism. Buchanan shows how Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" has been completely misread by free traders. He quotes Milton Friedman who says that Smoot-Hawley had nothing to do with the stock market crash. (It crashed 8 months BEFORE the tariff bill was even passed!) Mr. Buchanan's solutions are not completely wrapped up in tariffs, as another reviewer stated. He forgot to read the final chapter where Buchanan outlines a mix of tax, trade, and capital-accumulation policies. Wouldn't you love a tax system that didn't require the burdensome IRS reporting we now have? It's in this book. If Buchanan's practical policies are implemented, within five years the following would happen: Trade deficits would disappear; vulnerability to global financial crises would vanish; factories would spring up; millions of manufacturing jobs would be created; the demand for American workers and their pay scales would rise; the tax burden on American families would lighten; and America would be more self-reliant (no more OPEC handcuffs). Buchanan crushes the Ivory Tower theories of free trade economists who should be grateful for the very policies they criticize: job protection! Let's see how they'd feel about "free trade" if their 100% Tenure Tariff were removed. Maybe then their free trade theories would not be so extremist. There once was a higher value in America than The Bottom Line. It was called Freedom. Reading this book should be a requirement for every history teacher, economics professor and student in America who wants to PROTECT it.
Rating:
Summary: Finally! A Dissenting Voice on the Benefits of Free-Trade
Review: I knew next to nothing on the subject of free-trade before I read this book, but I must say I feel quite enlightened by the words and experiences or Mr. Buchanan. He makes an excellent historical case for economic nationalism - a practice embraced by Republicans throughout the 19th century. However, in terms of a modern defense of economic nationalism, I believe Buchanan relies too heavily on anecdotes and not enough on logical arguments. I happen to agree with Buchanan's conclusion that America and Americans must come first, without apology, in every economic decision our government makes. I only wish he had devoted more words to refuting specific free-trader arguments. Overall, an excellent book. Buchanan is a wonderful writer and a joy to read. I highly recommend the book to those who want to get familiar with the globalism/free-trade vs. protectionism/economic nationalism issue, particularly from a conservative populist perspective.
| 
