All of the news mags, both paper and digital, have left the carcass of the WTO "Battle in Seattle" behind them. Like so many piranhas, they have had their feeding frenzy and are on the lookout for the next cow that falls in the water.

So, now may be a good time to step back and look at some of the arguments put forth by "saner minds."

A recurring theme from the conservative mass was that more trade increases living standards for everyone. Who are we to deny Third World countries the wonders of capitalism? Who are these comfortable Westerners and why are they denying others the luxury trappings Western countries enjoy?

I find it difficult to understand this argument. Why are "Western ways" considered the best and only solution to the world's problems?

"We have the best health care!" scream the "experts." "We have the best health care because we have the most money. Therefore the more money everybody has the better health care will be."

No denying this. Better health care would be a great thing for all countries around the world (although, with the population expanding at such a tremendous rate, I have a hard time justifying the need for more people living longer).

I would have to say that increasing access to quality health care through trade would seem to be a painfully slow way of bringing up everyone's living standards. It is a start, though, and I can't argue with it. (Well, I can really, just not right now.)

There are, however, other arguments against those that were part of the Battle in Seattle. One argument that the clever and surely well-educated "saner heads" claim is that the environmental concerns of the protesters were completely groundless since more money means better education and more awareness of environmental issues. This clearly leads to the argument that the better off people are, the more they take care of the environment.

If you made it through the last paragraph, you may have noticed that the educated people of the Western world who use their cash to consume as much as they can with little regard for people or the environment are being held up as models for environmental responsibility! Always a pleasure to see a person who can hold two conflicting viewpoints in their head at the same time. The next time you see someone in a Suburban driving a block to the minimart for a quart of milk be sure to let them know what an environmentally responsible citizen they are.

Onward and upward. That the WTO is strictly for trade remains one of the central tenets of the pundits arguing against the protesters. If you have anything other than trade to discuss, please take it to an organization which deals with environmental issues.

I must say this would work fabulously if the organizations that lobby for environmental awareness and protection wielded as much power as "saner minds" would have you think.

Frankly and sadly, money rules the roost and has ever since anything has been worth trading. As much as Greenpeace, The World Wildlife Fund, The Sierra Club etc. can raise awareness and occasionally score a victory, people will respond much more quickly to money and the potential to get (or lose) it.

So, the next time a "saner mind" tries to convince you that trade is the "tide that floats all boats," think long and hard about how such arguments stand up in the real world.

Copyright © 2000 Stephen Van Esch All Rights Reserved

Stephen Van Esch is a writer and instructional designer living near Toronto, Canada. His location probably has something to do with his more socialist leanings. But hey, Canadians aren't Americans, are they?