George Will: Liar or Moron?

George W. Bush and his US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick are, as those of us who've been paying attention know, not very enthusiastic about free trade. Hence the import restrictions on bras, socks, steel, shrimp, etc., the increased farm subsidies, and the Australia "free trade" agreement that is, in fact, an effort to extend US intellectual property law to the land down under. Zoellick, in an unusual move other Bush administration officials may want to consider emulating, chooses in an interview with George Will, not to lie about this record. Zoellick is a mercantilist. His agricultural policy goal, rightly described as a herculean task, is "Prying open 147 economies at once" in order to boost exports. As Zoellick says, "How much can we eat? The markets have got to be abroad." He tells Will that his "aim is to insinuate 'some Hamiltonian concepts' into U.S. foreign policy." Hamilton being, of course, the leading mercantilist politician of the Founding era, a role in which he was followed by Henry Clay and Abraham Lincoln while being opposed by politicians in the Jefferson-Jackson tradition.

Will, however, writes this up as a column headlined "A Fighter For Free Trade" and ends by condemning John Kerry for offering "protectionism with an uneasy conscience." So here's the question: Does George Will, allegedly the intellectual among rightwing pundits, really not understand what a "Hamiltonian" trade policy consists of? This is not really an obscure moment in American political history, but rather, alongside slavery, the crucial issue of 19th century politics. Is he really unaware of the Bush administration's trade record? Is he some kind of fool? Or is he trying to mislead his readers?