Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Brazilian foreign minister's Nazi reference rocks WTO talks

BRADLEY S. KLAPPER

Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 12:15 AM EDT 20/07/08

Likens representations by wealthy countries to the tactics used by Joseph Goebbels ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Jim **** from Canada writes: Let's see. This article includes the trade story, but suggests the real news is the comments by a frustrated negotiator. Who do they think we are?
  2. Arthur Meighen from Siberia-on-the-Rideau, Canada writes: What an appalling comment. Everyone knows that Goebbels was a protectionist.
  3. M Warren from Ottawa, Canada writes: Well, public spokespersons have made stupid and ill-advised comments from time to time for every government everywhere, under every administration known to humankind, and at every conference ever held. I agree with Jim that this is not 'news', but just a PR gambit to allow some fear to be ratcheted up in the media down the road. SOMEONE is nervous because of the meeting on July 17 between the Presidents of Venezuela, Bolivia, and NEWLY OIL-RICH BRAZIL. That's all, and SOMEONE doesn't want the REAL story to get out. AND, WHY IS THIS STORY ONLY IN THE CUBAN MEDIA? SHAME!
  4. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: The real story is the Agricultural subsidies of the US and France in particular, although most G-8 inclusig Canada shate the guilt. These subsidies alonf with World Bank blackmail do more to keep the thir world poor and aid dependant than any other factors.

    And of course they negotiators of the west lie about it. The only thing wrong with the Brazilian's comment is that the Americans could have given Goebbels lessons in applying the big lie.
  5. martha stewart from Canada writes: What a pile of feigned distractionist outrage.

    Goebbels effectively wrote the manual for most modern PR and manipulation.

    If he was alive today he'd be working at the WWF, the Pentagon, or on Wall Street. Or a little higher up where they coordinate all three.
  6. pete peters from Canada writes: Amorim is a disgrace to Brazil and should be turfed.

    And to M Warren of Ottawa .. try decaf and lay off the conspiracy theories, willya. Any meeting that includes Chavas and Morales is an obvious baffoonfest and of no interest to anyone.
  7. Non Partisan I AM Canadian from Canada writes: I agree with Kenneth, and disagree with Pete.
  8. Summer of Discontent from Ottawa, Canada writes: Amorim's statement was correct that Goebbels did use the tactics in the PR realm and that they were very effective (regardless that the underlying fact that it was based on lies).

    Amorim was also quite honest in paralleling Goebbels tactics to the western economies... which the only response the west can muster is 'horror and personal affront'. What a joke. What will the next western response be? Amorim is racist, ethnocentric or a ranting tinpot wannabe?

    The truth hurts and any politically incorrect historical comparisons are not wanted to the unaccountable western countries.
  9. Eye Sore from Dog Pound, Alberta, Canada writes: So many public figures glibly throw around the Nazi-Hitler labels these
    days that you'd think they would've lost their shock value by now. 'Soup Nazi,' anyone?
  10. Zando Lee from Vancouver, Canada writes: ....this is just a red herring to mask the truth of the foreign minister's remarks....grow up Susan!!!....
  11. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: Anyone can see that a reference to Goebbels at a trade symposium would be simple misinterpretation of a historical fact. LOL.
  12. H C from Toronto, Canada writes: How tiresome. Just google the expression and see how many people have said the same thing, including the neocon Charles Krauthammer. Not very original to Amorim, and not very original of this Susan to take PERSONAL umbrage, which it clearly wasn't. How utterly silly. Now, as to the real issue, it's western agricultural subsidies... one of the deadly economic sins we've been insisting for so long the Third World get rid of...
  13. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: The only way you can trade with some one who has nothing to trade, and is already dependent on aid, is to give even more. Countries that want even more for nothing need to give more of whatever is asked in return. That's the nature of trade. Something of equal value or equally marketable traded for like materials or rights of access. The Brazilian Minister put insult upon trading ignorance with his Joseph Goebbels comment.
  14. H C from Toronto, Canada writes: Your problem, Troubled Youth, is your apparent lack of knowledge about anything that has transpired in decades of trade negotiations.
  15. Mark Orr from toronto, Canada writes: Bah, the only outrage here is how the US negotiators are trying to make hay by accusing Amorim of anti-semitisim etc. Why does any comparision to the Nazis cause such tiresome outrage. In the art of deception, the Nazi were quite adept.
  16. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: H C from Toronto, I suggest you read a little on the cereals market and it's impact on food and feed, and what it means being food independent and being a net food importing economy. Global Market. As of late 2007, increased farming for use in biofuels, world oil prices at $130 a barrel as of 2Q 2008, The global grain bubble, global population growth, climate change, loss of agricultural land to residential and industrial development, growing consumer demand in China and India and feeding 635 million tons per year to livestock as fodder have pushed up the price of grain. Food riots have recently taken place in many countries across the world. Water deficits, causing decrease in grain production, is one cause of grain independence. It already spurs heavy grain imports in numerous smaller countries, may soon do the same in larger countries, such as China or India. The water tables are falling in scores of countries (including Northern China, the US, and India) due to widespread overpumping using powerful diesel and electric pumps. Other countries affected include Pakistan, Iran, and Mexico. This will eventually lead to water scarcity and cutbacks in grain harvest. Even with the overpumping of its aquifers, China is developing a grain deficit. When this happens, it will almost certainly drive grain prices upward. Most of the 3 billion people projected to be added worldwide by mid-century will be born in countries already experiencing water shortages. After China and India, there is a second tier of smaller countries with large water deficits — Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Mexico, and Pakistan. Four of these already import a large share of their grain. Only Pakistan remains self-sufficient. But with a population expanding by 4 million a year, it will also likely soon turn to the world market for grain.
  17. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: In April 2008, the Brazilian government announced a temporary ban on the export of rice. The ban is intended to protect domestic consumers. This is the actions of the unfortunately misunderstood Brazilian Minister.
  18. CM Chen from Toronto, Canada writes: People losing or frustrated an argument frequently turns towards using shock terms like the Nazi's references. Besides offensive, it also can lead to degeneration of the discussion to a name calling one.

    One would expect foreign ministers to know better. Well, no one is immune to it. For us, recall the colourful words that a couple of our MP had used to describe the U.S. President and people.
  19. D F from Calgary, Canada writes: I would better say United States press secretary propaganda looks like Goebbels propaganda
  20. bob saunders from Belleville, ON, Canada writes: I have no problem with the Brazilians minister's comment. It is absolutely true what he says, but Brazil is guilty of using subsidies themselves so it is a bit of pot calling kettle black. Troubled youth; good post. Most countries that can afford to subsidize food, oil, transportation, industry,electricity, gas,education...etc.
  21. Vadim ! from Toronto, Canada writes: Mark Orr,

    You say ' the only outrage here is how the US negotiators are trying to make hay by accusing Amorim of anti-semitisim etc. Why does any comparision to the Nazis cause such tiresome outrage.'

    I'm glad you bring this up because it shows an ignorance that many people have on this post on the simple fact that Hitler and the Nazis gassed, cooked, shot, experimented on, and maimed over 6 million Jews in what was called the 'Final Solution'. How exactly are the Americans 'making hay' of Amorim's comments? Are the American's trade tactics somehow morally equivalent to killing Jews? That either shows how you are anti-Semitic yourself or, most likely, morally obtuse.

    The inability to grasp the gravity and significance of the holocaust is increasing over time and will simply fade away as the memories of those who were alive to experience it die with them.

    History is indeed doomed to repeat itself when remarks like Amorim's are ignored rather than confronted. Good for the Americans and God bless them!

    Vadim
  22. Har Har from Canada writes: He is absolutely right. The idea of free trade as described by our leaders is a joke.

    Just like the U.S. cheats our softwood lumber industry by giving their own industry subsidies and tax breaks, we cheat other countries by giving our farmers subsidies and tax breaks.

    Trade is war though, and a large part of the job of our intelligence services is to make sure we win the war.

    Sorry, but trade has winners and losers, which one should we be?
  23. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: Instead of wagging her finger in personal outrage, it would be more constructive if Schwab recognized that Amorim's comment, though indeed vulgar, was born from decades of frustration with the US's (and Europe's) inability to recognize the damaging effects of farm tariffs. Most developing nations share this frustration, Brazil is not alone. And for his part, Amorim was trying to create a historical analogy that would make the gravity of the situation apparent to the Americans, who have been strong allies of Israel and extraordinarily conscious of the Holocaust.

    It's a bit sad that Amorim's unfortunate, lone comment was amplified by Schwab (and the press) and is now being used as the moral basis to derail the talks. Amorim apologized - now let's move forward with the talks.
  24. David K from Guelph, Canada writes: The sad fact of the matter is that The Big Lie has been used for many years by all political stripes. The fact that Goebbels said it out loud and can be linked to the comment enables offending politicians to be "shocked and appalled" that anyone would link them with "those kinds of people". What a pity because the sooner we all stop using Big Lies to further our respective causes the sooner we will start to make progress, I hope...
  25. Ed Anger from Canada writes: Poor countries need access to markets not handouts. There are 8 billion people in the world . 7 billion are poor and if we dont trade with them they will become our enemies and the west seems to have no shortage of this. Its criminally and morally wrong to deny these people access to our markets at the most basic trade level by creating subsidies for special interest groups.
    Yes their are winners and losers but in perspective free trade reduces poverty (and enemies) for millions in third world countries at the net expense of thousands in the first world. This seems a fair trade off unless you happen to be one of the thousands in the first world who lose their job. At least in the first world we have appropriate social network systems.
  26. Rain Couver from Canada writes: Trying to ingratiate oneself with a block of countries that holds all of the cards, by telling them to stop subsidizing their own citizens, by using a reference to a person who made it his life's work to justify the killing of Jews is the wrong tactic. Wether this guy is right or wrong is now irrelevant, especially since the specter of Brazil's reputation for hiding Nazis after the war. It is time to bring in a new negotiator, especially since this one has been unsuccessful for so many years.
  27. E. Biggs from Canada writes: Martha You are very selective in your group who might use him.

    Add CNN, FOX, CBC, CTV, all politicians, the left wing and the right wing and every person who believes all their spin and reiterates them as if they were true.
  28. Philip McRae from Vancouver, Canada writes: Yes. The subsidies are the problem when it comes to trading with nations who have nothing to trade. LOL. Get rid of subsidies and see how fast you have nothing to trade; meaning surplus. We are already loosing our farmers at an alarming rate because farming is less profitable and more labour intensive than working for someone else. The benefits package alone is something envied. Never mind a nice union wage. I wonder what a pound of potatoes would cost coming from a union farm. A pound of beef from a union ranch who has to pay for union feed. No wait. How about a union ranch that is dependent on a foreign country to produce a surplus of feed grains to raise cattle to put beef on the market. Oh my. Talk about being f___ed.
  29. K St-Pierre from toronto, Canada writes: Vadim- I think you are missing the point of what he said. He wasn't commenting on the holocaust but on what mechanism was used to make it so- propaganda. While u are right in remembering history is important, you miss the fact that it is only important if we compare it to contemporary actions/events. How will we learn if we don't analyse it in that way? Nazism is not an isolated event, just a current iteration of man's inherent flaw that has been with us forever. That's one of the main lesson's we should be learning from that event. Amorim was correct in his comparison, and if u really care about the horror's of the holocaust then u should applaud him for his statement.
  30. Vadim ! from Toronto, Canada writes: K St-Pierre,

    I'm afraid you're missing the point. Goebbels was the "Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propoganda" for several years leading up to and during the holocaust. If you believe words are important (and I believe you do given you're commenting on an article about what someone said), then you would surely agree that Goebbels is arguably the man most responsible for holocaust.

    Whether Amorim is commenting directly on the holocaust (which he wasn't) or the "mechanism" as you say that brought it on is splitting hairs. You raise a good point that we need to learn from history, but you completely miss the mark when you suggest how we apply our learnings. It would be more appropriate if Amorim likened Goebbels to characters who twist the minds of impressionable people like Arafat or Nasrallah. But to compare him to America's trade group is insulting and demeans the memory of all those who died because of Goebbels "mechanism" for destroying people.

    Peace,

    Vadim
  31. Canadian Pragmatist from Canada writes: A large number of the western countries were just as responsible for the Holocaust as the Nazi's. They were willing to turn a blind eye as long as it did not directly affect them or require them to do anything.
  32. K St-Pierre from toronto, Canada writes: Vadim- Well I guess on that we will have to disagree. The use of propaganda is the issue, and he was commenting on the use of spin by western states. Hence Goebbels comparison was a'propos. I think perhaps you do not consider the scope or affect these trade regulations have on third world countries. Maybe then you would consider the two scenarios as being in the same sphere, if not equivalent (I'm not saying they are equivalent per se, but there is potential for it given starvation rates in some countries). A good book called "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" talks about the reality of global trade/free trade and world bank/imf policies on third world countries. The result is displaced peoples, violence against said peoples, slave labour, enviromental degradation ect. The cumulative affect of these policies does have the potential for the genocide of entire states, or minority groups (who are poor and disenfranchised from the system but reside in resource rich area's of a state) within a state.
  33. Vadim ! from Canada writes: K St-Pierre,

    I guess you're right; potential for genocide is equivalent to actual genocide. I get it now.

    Vadim
  34. John Dixon from Vancouver, Canada writes: Agreed. The head US negotiator at a major international trade meeting has such delicate sensibilities that she is incapacitated by shock at the mere mention of the name "Goebbels"? Gimme a break. This is obviously a ploy to direct attention away from the real issue (the one that Brasil is p/o'd about) and occupy the media with discussions about Nazis. The first world needs to do away with farm subsidies so that the developing world can compete and their farmers can afford to plant. Simple as that. Adopting supply management policies like Canada's dairy and poultry industries would be a good start: Those farmers make a good buck in Canada and don't recieve government subsidies.
  35. John Ishmael from Brampton ON, Canada writes: He spoke truth to power. Now he will pay the price.
  36. Ariel Laver from Vancouver, Canada writes: I have to ask, what is accomplished by making such a comparison? You certainly won't be more respected by the major players in the WTO after doing so. The only friends you gain by making a statement like that are anti-Americans, anti-westerners, and perhaps anti-semites.

    That's just a poor political move anyway you look at it, provided that the foreign minister is in fact interested in pursuing economic success through globalization.
  37. martha stewart from Canada writes: E. Biggs writes: "Martha You are very selective in your group who might use him.

    Add CNN, FOX, CBC, CTV, all politicians, the left wing and the right wing and every person who believes all their spin and reiterates them as if they were true."

    Right you are. It goes on and on. The media outlets are simply the messengers though. I just thought the three I did mention would indicate how widespread this is.

    Or perhaps it is all caused by Global Warming? That's got to be true. I've heard that thousands of times...
  38. Rt. Revd. Malachy Egan from Halifax, Canada writes: Grow up everybody!

    Trudeau drove around Ottawa on a motorbike wearing a coal scuttle helmet and giving the nazi salute to all and sundry. So I'd back this Foreign Minister for President!

    Martha Stewarts comment is valid: if Goebells [who, according to the WWII ditty, had no balls at all] were around today he'd be writing policy manuals for the entire political upper echelon.
  39. Philip McRae from Vancouver, Canada writes: It's not so much that this idiot Amorim fell back on a tired and outworn attack and used it on those who didn't answer to his every need. It's that his government is protectionist, uses subsidies, and went even further to actually ban the exportation of rice. This accuser is a representative of the problem he wants others to hold the blame for. Susan Schwab should not have taken umbrage, rather given Celso Amorim a swift kick in his um...bragage.
  40. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: "... what it means being food independent and being a net food importing economy."

    That's the heart of the trade problem. The US and EU in particular make it difficult if not impossible for third world countries to develop farming on a commercial level sufficient to feed their own populace by denying them access to the world's largest markets.

    The result is that in many countries farming is limited to miserable subsistence levels, with peasants barely able to feed themselves in good years.

    Of course, you get horror stories like Mugabe's deliberate dismantling of Zimbabwe's agricultural economy, but that's another problem entirely.
  41. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: GlynnMhor of Skywall, If any African nation wanted to put their energy and their productivity into developing a comprehensive farming initiative neither Europe or the U.S. could do anything to prohibit the sale of said grains. They can sell cheaper than Americans with or with out subsidies becouse it will be years before they face such inflation or cost of living penalties on their labour force or income payments and assoc. benefits perks. What these countries want is access to American and European markets with out meeting any conditions plus a food/monetary aid package that comes to them with out conditions or expectations on their part. This issue is much larger than the Brazilian Ministers dumb comment and has been in many guises been rejected on the basis that no nation is going to hand their ability to feed themselves over to some developing country that has no political or ideological stability. Every state in the European union has rejected such an idea, so has most South American nations, Canada and the U.S. The U.S. pays out something like 190 billion in farm subsidies of which 80-90 billion are direct transfers to food aid donations. Those developing countries need to look to their own habits and practises rather than blaming America or even Europe. As the water crunch furthers less and less will be available for those who have squandered their years in power to fulfil their selfish desires, abuse their own people, rather than forward their society. It isn't just Zimbabwe. It's every one from south to north Africa and many other nations beyond. Food and drinking water is going to become the weapons of the next century. Those who can feed their people will survive. Those who can defend their source of water...the new OPEC.
  42. Non Partisan I AM Canadian from Canada writes: To those who tie this mans comments to "making references to holocaust":

    What's your problem? Goerring did not have highly publicized trade practices? Are they unmentionable? Is it wrong to point out very similar practices; when found?

    Goerring was a very dominant businessman, and negotiator. Heck; this dude MAY have been giving a compliment, were it said by a passive onlooker!!

    So..."No mention of any practices of the NAzi party...ever".

    new rule?
  43. Non Partisan I AM Canadian from Canada writes: "Those who can feed their people will survive."

    Ya; that's new.

    (rolls eyes)
  44. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: "GlynnMhor: If any African nation wanted to put their energy and their productivity into developing a comprehensive farming initiative neither Europe or the U.S. could do anything to prohibit the sale of said grains."

    For a start it's not the nations, it's the farmers.

    And the US and Europe can and do prohibit the sale of foodstuffs into their markets and use the nearly equally effective means of setting import tariffs prohibitively high. Peanuts, for example, can only be sold in the US by american holders of peanut quota.
  45. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: "GlynnMhor: ... no nation is going to hand their ability to feed themselves..."

    I'm not sure what this is about, but you may be referring to the outrageous subsidy levels to farmers to create the famous 'mountains of butter and lakes of milk' in excess of consumption that still plague the EU.
  46. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: GlynnMhor, sure foodstuffs they already grow. And give subsidies for growing or not growing. Doesn't make sense to import what you already have a surplus of. There are many nations who would be willing to trade with any nation with a surplus. China, India, Iran, Saudi-Arabia, the Philippines, Malaysia, just to name a few who need to import grain. China is willing to make any trade deal with out imposing any social or ideological expectations. I'm sure the other anti-western nations would be equally willing. This idea that the west is the keeper of the third world has to go. Time to spread the responsibility in a more global direction. America as a scapegoat for the worlds ills no longer flies under world globalism. Google peak grain and then after some good reading try peak water. Food and water aren't taken for granted by anyone who has cast an eye to the future. GHG is a joke next to these two and people will breathe coal dust if it means they have three squares a day. People wont worry about GHG's on an empty stomach or with a dry well. And food production tomorrow will require a large investment in fuel and water that few developing countries will achieve being overwhelmed by tribalism and regional warfare that is becoming the norm. Or always was depending on your POV. When things get rough domestic policy and issues takes centre stage not foreign policy or pan-international actions. Protectionism deepens. It's not relaxed. Tomorrow is going to be rough on those nations who thought it cool to encourage an uncontrolled population expansion to secure a religious regime or enrich themselves at the world aid trough.
  47. Don Portz from Trochu AB, Canada writes: The Braziliam foreign minister's remarks have now dealt a far more devastating blow to the Trade Talks on what was very shaky at best in the first place. Too bad, but there always seems to be someone to upset the apple cart.
  48. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: "GlynnMhor Doesn't make sense to import what you already have a surplus of."

    It makes even less sense to pay out lavish sums of money in subsidies for that which you already have in surplus.

    Then there's the moral problem in distoring markets to the point of driving innocent victims into poverty and misery.
  49. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled ... writes:"...other anti-western nations... peak grain... peak water."

    This is supposed to be about trade, not world conspiracies.
  50. J M from Canada writes: This is major deflection away from trade issues manipulating the public's hypersensitivity to anti-semitism.
  51. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: GlynnMhor,"...the moral problem in distoring markets to the point of driving innocent victims into poverty and misery. " Now I understand you. We owe trade to those with nothing to trade. And if we don't supply them the goods to trade back for more goods we're victimizing them. WoW. Answer me this. How come the youngest nations in the world, Canada and the U.S. are responsible for the oldest nations in the world? Why aren't the Muslim States, the Africans feeding and caring for the North American's. They're hundreds and hundreds of years older and more established than we at 250-300 years in the game of survival?
  52. Nassar Ben Houdja from Canada writes: Anything to avoid talking about the real issues. Pay attention to your business, snivelling about the 1940's is so 20th century, how'd that work for you? Time to do things a litle different and right for a change.
  53. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: "GlynnMhor:,... Now I understand you. We owe trade to those with nothing to trade. And if we don't supply them the goods to trade back for more goods we're victimizing them."

    You don't understand me.

    What we as societies do NOT owe is grotesque internal subsidies to agricultural businesses accompanied by self-serving and hypocritical food aid to the people whose efforts to grow food themselves have been quashed by the floods of below-cost product on the international markets.

    For the betterment of our own economies as well as those in countries that cannot afford ridiculous subsidies we need to dismantle the current protectionism and subsidy regime.
  54. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: GlynnMhor, I appreciate your support of those mature, historical nations who have not after millennium come to equality as that produced by the child nations of Canada and the United States. However, it is our markets we subsidies for our own protection and do not do so to harm those unwilling to provide for their people. I can only by your post conclude that it is trade that is bad and a confusion of idealism and what is noble in the idea of those not having the produce others build for themselves and receiving aid to balance that perception of scale. We are young and great societies built on effort and work ethic and do not owe a feeling of guilt for our success, nor owe other nations who may have or may not have exactly the same, nor a responsibility to give to achieve a universal equality of goods. Trade is trade. Giving up an ability to feed your society that is dependent on union wages, high benefit packages, high property values, inflationary market forces with competing societies so that a nation or society can not only take your market but control the price of the basic national necessity of food makes no sense to me. I gave up on idealism way back when. I like practical realities. Poor nations that can not support/feed their population need to take steps to manage their population not encourage over population to get more aid and contribute less. Nations, societies have responsibilities to their own first and foremost. It may not jive with your idealism but it is a hard cold fact. Aid is one thing and why not gift what one has in surplus but, surrendering a market. And courting a foreign dependency. That's not reasonable to my mind. We come from very different places as we view this spectrum of market forces, enterprises and trade initiatives.
  55. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: "GlynnMhor, I appreciate your support of those mature, historical nations... young and great societies..."

    About what on earth are you raving? This isn't about nations or sociewties except to the extent that national governments screw with trade.

    "Giving up an ability to feed your society... so that a nation or society can not only take your market but control the price of the basic national necessity of food makes no sense to me."

    Paying higher prices rather than lower ones, and paying even more in taxes is not an improvement. And it's not a 'nation or society' but just farmers; people.

    You seem to be mired in the 18th and 19th century concepts of imperialism wherein a country had to control places in order to have trade with them. The days of trade being almost exclusively within empires are long past, and it's time to recognize that fact.
  56. Philip McRae from Vancouver, Canada writes: Troubled Youth, those are quite the posts. However few will spend the intellectual resources to attempt to grasp your point. Most here have never had to do with out and can not perceive a moment when they will have do do with out, let alone make any drastic life changes. The prevailing liberal thinking is that those that have owe a debt to those who haven't. They rant on about subsidies but would never admit that another word for subsidy is charity. Exactly what they want the poor nations to exploit rather than our minimum wage farmer living and working to provide, as you say, in a high cost high inflation, high cost of living, market driven society with higher wage demands, taxation and social benefit strategies. These same people are willing to pay some state sponsored farmers in Nairobi or Timbuktu a better relative wage than their own farmers. The people who want to take the food and future from our farmers to give it to some foreign nation want to call it trade. LOL.
  57. gerhard beck from Canada writes: So where is the problem? Bush and Co lie and lie and people believe (or did) them to tell the truth, so did Goebbels.
  58. Brad Fgroupthinkn from Canada writes: Should he apologize because it was a hurtful memory, or because the statement was true?
  59. Har Har from Canada writes: Brazil is on its way to becoming a superpower alongside China and India.

    They don't NEED to sign a trade deal until the deal sufficiently benefits them.

    If they sell oranges to America they should get the same government handouts and tax breaks that the orange growers in Florida get for there to actually be "Free Trade".
  60. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Does Godwin's law apply to International Trade?
  61. Philip McRae from Vancouver, Canada writes: Reductio ad Hitlerum, also argumentum ad Hitlerum is the flip side of Godwin's Rule. Though while Godwin's Law came to life in 1990 in relation to the internet blog overusage: Reductio ad Hitlerum was coined by academic ethicist, Leo Strauss, in 1950. The fallacy most often assumes the form of "Hitler (or the Nazis) supported X, therefore X must be evil/undesirable/bad". The argument carries emotional weight as rhetoric, since in many cultures anything relating to Hitler or Nazis is automatically condemned. Either way it's a debate killer and is for that reason often interjected. It's a way to pack up your toys and leave the sandbox without accruing a penalty. The Brazilian Minister used it to take the spotlight off his nations subsidies and having also stopped rice exports to further Brazilian protectionism. "Let the Yankee's take the heat" is a common cry from the cheap seats who want the advantages of the "have not's" as well as garner the most favourable trade conditions with out costing them any reciprocal considerations.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top