I still don't understand

how people can oppose free trade in the 21st century. Here's a letter from a "progressive" (actually, very regressive) think tank, the Oakland Institute, in the New York Times:

"
Applauding the Cafta 15" (editorial, July 29), in recommending a pat on the back for the 15 Democrats who broke with the party line to vote in favor of the Central American Free Trade Agreement, claims that Cafta will lift the economies of the six countries into the 21st century by helping job growth in that region.

You then go on to mention how Cafta will benefit low-income American consumers, who might get to pay 50 cents less for their T-shirts.

What you are really talking about is Cafta's ushering in a dark, 19th-century Dickens era into these countries, where young children and women will labor in sweatshops making T-shirts that cost 50 cents less and therefore appeal to the pockets of the displaced American workers, especially in the textile industry.

Anuradha Mittal
Oakland, Calif., July 29, 2005
The writer is executive director of the Oakland Institute, a progressive think tank.
"

Can anyone actually discuss their analysis with a straight face? These people support the very same policies with the very same vigor as outspoken racists. They're brainwashed into thinking good things can come out of protectionism, but the saddest part is they use humanitarian language to promote their xenophobic agenda.

Again, I challenge anyone to name a time protectionism has worked. Can you really restrict your way to prosperity? Will anyone that agrees with the Oakland Institute ever be given a Nobel Prize for changing the world for the better? Of course all speech is tolerated but it's such a shame that the anti-scientific policies they advocate are considered.