Tag Archives: 96-3

Free and Fair Trade

by Michael Pasternak (ME ’17)

We’ve all heard of free trade, it’s become a hot button topic in the political sphere in recent times. However, who but the coffee drinkers among us have heard of fair trade? Few likely, yet it’s becoming a real alternative among economists and policy makers. Fair trade is a bit more complex, but free trade is simple in concept and execution: lower as many barriers as possible to international trade in order to allow free movement of goods and services and unlock wider and larger markets for everyone involved.

As a nation, we have to address that
not all foreign labor markets should
be endorsed by trade.

As a general economic principle, free trade means growth. I say this as an absolute truth: there are next to no economists in the mainstream academic sphere who believe otherwise. A University of Chicago poll from 2014 asked a panel of economists from the Initiative on Global Markets if “past major trade deals have benefited most Americans.” Twenty-three percent strongly agreed, 70% agreed, and 7% were uncertain or chose not to respond. There were no panelists who disagreed or disagreed strongly. The debate of free trade versus economic controls and tariffs is purely political and the sides are clear cut. Those on one side interpret data and use history to make decisions; those on the other side choose to only interpret fear and use trade policy as a thinly veiled substitute for xenophobia.

That being said, even once it’s established that breaking down barriers to trade is unequivocally positive, there are other concerns. As a nation, we have to address that not all foreign labor markets should be endorsed by trade. For example, sanctions on nations like Russia, who commit war crimes and invade neighboring countries at will, are appropriate because even though sanctions can hurt trade in the short term, war and instability are barriers to free trade in the medium and long term. It’s hard to trade in a war torn country where roads and bridges are not functioning and the banks aren’t open. Furthermore, you need domestic stability for economic growth. Countries who carry out war elsewhere may still experience growth, but there are few to no examples of countries in which wars are being fought that experience growth in trade. Therefore, it’s in the interest of a nation looking to maximize trade to maximize global and domestic stability. In fact, American foreign policy can be much more easily understood through that lens. Where we are militarily active, it’s usually for the sake of trying to keep regions under control in a general sense. We have a carrier group near China, for example, in order to prevent conflict between them Taiwan or Japan. The more critical a trade partner, the more resources the US is willing to commit to their region’s stability. That’s a big reason why we have such a strong tie with Israel.

However, there does enter another factor: morality and development. It isn’t an explicit duty of the United States to prevent the likes of slavery and war for the sake of preventing human suffering. Nonetheless, there’s a drive from a significant segment of the populace to do exactly that. Fair trade is the movement to address moral concerns of unfettered free trade, mostly driven from the political far-left but economically spread among academic doctrines. For example, slavery is not dead. North Korea uses slavery on a massive scale, and Qatar is known to be using slaves for much of the construction of its upcoming 2022 FIFA World Cup infrastructure. Indonesia, China, and India have problems with slavery or near-slave labor conditions. Fair trade, in theory, accomplishes two things: establish an even playing field for labor and guarantee rights for workers. It accomplishes those goals by preventing countries with horrible regulatory frameworks for human rights to enter trade agreements without concessions concerning guaranteed rights for workers.

There’s a very real debate currently occurring between proponents of the two types of trade; a debate that is philosophical just as much as it is economic in nature. I consider myself a proponent of fair trade, but there’s little data currently available to prove the long term positive effects actually exist. One thing, however, is sure: while particular trade agreements can have issues, we should aim to increase free trade wherever we can as long as we do not have a corresponding cost, and there’s no reason to return to the days of tariff past. ◊

Music Review: 22, A Million

by Noah Fechter (CE ’20)

Photo by Cameron Wittig & Crystal Quinn.
Photo by Cameron Wittig & Crystal Quinn.

Justin Vernon, whose band Bon Iver achieved prominence with the 2007 release of For Emma, Forever Ago, has an uncanny ability for sneaking into the spotlight. The story has been told ad nauseum: in a cabin somewhere in Wisconsin, For Emma was forged in unmitigated introspection and authenticity. 2011’s self-titled album, Bon Iver, built on the sincerity of his songwriting and helped the album catch a broader audience. At some point Bon Iver had a following so large that it started caving in on itself. The band went on hiatus.

On July 22, 2016, Bon Iver’s Facebook page posted a video with audio from the single “22 (OVER S∞∞N)” and an abstract contemporary art style. It was clear from then that this album would be another example of an artist stepping away from their fanbase. It was unclear, however, just what meaning was to be found in the flickering pop-art patterns and (vaguely satanic) religious symbols. Bon Iver had emerged from the underworld.

But why did Bon Iver go to such lengths for a new artistic direction? Pitchfork Media’s Amanda Petrusich called 22, A Million “…an unexpected turn towards the strange and experimental,” inspired by Vernon’s “hunger for true, tectonic innovation,” even comparing the change in sound to Radiohead’s 2000 album Kid A. And indeed, Bon Iver succeeds in finding a sound that is sometimes absolutely arcane. The single and opening track “22 (OVER S∞∞N)” captures a gospel quality in verses interspersed with feedback noise and a vocoder sample Vernon captured during a panic attack in recording. “10 d E A T h b R E a s T ⚄ ⚄” another single released simultaneously, is comprised of shuffling, breakbeat drums, grumbling waves of bass, triumphal vocal composition backed by horns, and a single, bleating, pitch augmented vocal sample echoing through the background. These tracks seem more closely inspired by West Coast alternative hip-hop than the four years Bon Iver spent as the purveyor of Northeastern Americana.

22, A Million still bears reminders that Bon Iver can convey immense beauty and enveloping emotions. The track “29 #Strafford APTS” is a page out of an earlier Bon Iver release, the folk rock instrumentation breathing heavily through a coating of dense chrome. The melodies, chord progressions, and timbre are so reminiscent that­­—minutes into the song—the switch to sharp vocoder vocals serrates the image as it is drawn. This track is the tour de force of the album, an imperative showing that this electronic, inhuman sound can also evoke feelings of nostalgia and warmth. “____45_____,” the second to final track, brings up the obvious Kanye West influence on Vernon’s writing. The song is comprised of another choir of vocal harmonies, a horn section put through auto-tune, and­—at the tail-end of the track—a plucked banjo with heavy reverb. It’s precariously similar to “Lost In The World,” Vernon’s collaboration with Kanye West on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. The component parts of these tracks easily stand apart from one another, but the end product is in parts distant, powerful, and wavering.

There’s a lot of callback in 22, A Million, whether intentional or not. The vocoder asides that comprise the songs “715 – CR∑∑KS” and “____45_____” are nearly sparse enough to be hip-hop track interludes. The songs “29 #Strafford APTS,” “666 ʇ,” and “8 (circle)” feature more organic vocal compositions, evocative of prior Bon Iver releases. The gospel-esque vocal arrangements on many tracks reflect a popular trend in hip-hop that very prominent 2016 releases by Chance the Rapper, and again Kanye West, have spearheaded. The vocoder’s furious, breakbeat drums, ‘chipmunked’ vocal samples, and surging gospel harmonies have all been acclaimed by music reviewers everywhere. With the knowledge that Vernon is buying into these trends, then the question is surely “where is the novelty in 22, A Million?

The image that Vernon carved for 22, A Million is cryptic, goading the listener to investigate the deep and fulfilling meaning that the album has to offer. Yet, even the first listen yields an easy experience deep-seated in nostalgia and recollection. Every one of the ten tracks on the album now has a lyric video publicly available for every word to be mulled over, and the album is only fractionally longer than an episode of a sitcom. Though this album is wearing a style more beckoning, more ambitious, and more ambiguous than those before it, it’s still Bon Iver. This is still approachable, welcoming music, written in a sonic language that is well established, and naturally accepted by audiences with open ears. ◊

Miles of Movies: Deepwater Horizon

by Miles Barber (CE ’18)

Deepwater Horizon is about the events surrounding the explosion on Deepwater, a Texas oil rig owned by British Petroleum. The film follows the events leading up to the explosion and how the crew tried their best to evacuate.

The first half of this film features Mike Williams (Mark Wahlberg), who explains how his rig works to his daughter for a school project. He uses a soda can to explain how the rig works by capping the pressure from the oil. A lot of this introduction with Mike’s family serves both as exposition and character development. Mixed in with Mike’s screen time, you get little errors happening on the rig, giving you a sense of foreboding and worry.

Though other characters are introduced when we reach the rig, Mike continues to be the main character in this film. While this half of the film is a little slower than the second half, it is still tense, as each of the little problems is so well introduced. Once Mike gets on the rig, he meets Jimmy Harrell (Kurt Russell), a no-nonsense supervisor who hates corporate interference which, in this film, is presented in the form of Vidrine (John Malkovich). Kurt Russell is such a force in this film and gives a really strong performance; he’s easy to get behind since he argues for safety when others don’t prioritize it. Something also worthy of praise is the sound design during the buildup, which lets you in on every creak in the rig, every little bubble of escaped pressure.

Then, the rig explodes. This half of the film is nonstop intensity, giving you no time to breathe. The camera shakes a little to make it feel real. The explosions are everywhere, as if there was nothing on the rig that couldn’t explode. The water is on fire. The makeup team makes each and every one of the characters look grimy and hurt. Everything feels like it could have happened as shown. The only thing that doesn’t quite work are the effects: some of the wide shots of the rig falling apart just don’t look realistic.

Overall, Deepwater Horizon is an effective disaster film. It’s well-acted, has good sound, and effectively presents the buildup and the aftermath of the explosion. Kurt Russell, in particular, is excellent. The effects weren’t quite as good as I might have hoped and I think the film could have been better explained at points (maybe it’s still unclear what happened) but I would recommend seeing this film if you’re a fan of disaster films. ◊

Grade: B-