反全球化当思《谷物法》

分享此页面到:

Finance & economics

财经板块

Corn Laws scythed, 175 years on

《谷物法》被收割后，175年过去了

The appeal of Peel and repeal

皮尔的上诉和废除

What the end of Britain's Corn Laws in 1846 says about free trade today

1846年英国《谷物法》的废除对今天的自由贸易有什么启发

About half of most British people's income in the 1830s and 1840s was spent on food. Hunger was commonplace, occasionally sparking riots. Contributing to the high cost were tariffs on imported grain, called the Corn Laws, which soared as high as 80%. The system enriched aristocratic landowners when most Britons were not allowed to serve in Parliament or vote.

在19世纪30年代和40年代，大多数英国人大约有一半的收入花在食物上。饥饿是家常便饭，偶尔还会引发骚乱。对进口谷物征收的关税，也就是所谓的《谷物法》，导致了高昂的成本，关税飙升了80%。当大多数英国人不被允许在议会任职或投票时，这种制度使贵族地主们富裕起来。

Facing public anger, a famine in Ireland and fears of starvation in Britain, the prime minister, Robert Peel, introduced legislation to end the tariffs. On June 25th 1846 the House of Lords repealed the Corn Laws, following a House of Commons vote a month earlier. It marked a major moment in the history of open economies. How it was achieved offers lessons to those defending the global trading system today.

面对公众的愤怒、爱尔兰的饥荒和英国对饥饿的恐惧，总理罗伯特·皮尔提出了终止关税的立法。1846年6月25日上议院废除了《谷物法》，此前一个月下议院进行了投票。这是开放经济体历史上的一个重要时刻，它的实现方式为今天捍卫全球贸易体系的人提供了教训。

The first lesson is to organise a broad coalition and creatively use the media. It was not simply the poor who had an interest in lower grain prices. A new generation of prosperous manufacturers and moralminded aristocrats joined forces. They established what might be one of the first lobbying groups, the Anti-Corn Law League, which hosted rallies, financed research and supported political candidates. Books and pamphlets sprang up to make the case. The Economist itself was founded in 1843 to campaign for the abolition of the Corn Laws and for free trade.

第一个教训是，组织广泛的联盟，创造性地利用媒体。不仅是穷人对较低的粮食价格感兴趣，新一代繁荣的制造商和有道德的贵族也联合到了一起。他们建立了反谷物法联盟，这可能是最早的游说团体之一。该联盟主办集会，资助研究，并支持政治候选人，书籍和小册子也纷纷涌现。《经济学人》本身成立于1843年，其宗旨是为废除《谷物法》和自由贸易而战。

The second lesson is the need for small victories to generate momentum, rather than going for big wins immediately— Peel's policy of "gradualism". His plan did not fully remove sliding-scale tariffs until 1849, giving time for landowners to adapt. Meanwhile, Britain's free-trade moves helped usher in a wave of trade agreements across Europe and with America.

第二个教训是，需要小的胜利来产生动力，而不是立即取得大的胜利——皮尔的“渐进主义”政策。他的计划直到1849年才完全取消浮动关税，给土地所有者时间来适应。与此同时，英国的自由贸易举措在欧洲和美国掀起了一波贸易协定浪潮。

The third lesson is the need for tangible benefits for the public. By 1850, people were paying around a quarter less for bread than if repeal had not occurred, according to Kevin O'Rourke of NYU Abu Dhabi. The real incomes of society's top 10% fell, while those of the bottom 90% grew slightly, notes Douglas Irwin of Dartmouth College.

第三个教训是，公众需要切实的利益。据阿布扎比纽约大学的凯文·奥罗克称，到1850年，人们购买面包的费用比废除该法案之前减少了1/4。达特茅斯学院的道格拉斯·欧文指出，社会上收入最高的10%的人的实际收入下降了，而收入最低的90%的人的实际收入略有增长。

Much can be learned from Peel's approach. Today, free trade is promoted by stale policy wonks and rapacious executives, nothing like the broad, energetic coalition of the past. Opponents of globalisation use social media far more effectively than its supporters. Politicians vie for grand gestures rather than quiet incrementalism. And the benefits of free trade are largely hidden from consumers. Those who take to the ramparts to protest against globalisation fail to notice why their smartphones are so cheap.

我们可以从皮尔的方法中学到很多东西。如今，自由贸易与过去广泛而积极的联盟不同，相反是由陈腐的政策书呆子和贪婪的高管推动的。全球化的反对者比支持者更有效地利用了社交媒体。政客们争夺的是大刀阔斧的姿态，而不是安静的渐进主义。自由贸易的好处在很大程度上被消费者所掩盖。那些拿起壁垒来抗议全球化的人没有注意到他们的智能手机为什么这么便宜。

Yet the most important lesson is about leadership. Peel had opposed repealing the Corn Laws but, faced with a crisis, he was willing to split his party and lose his job to do the right thing. The divided Conservatives rarely held power during the following 30 years. It was "the whole community" that mattered, Peel wrote in his memoirs, and whether "cheapness and plenty are not (better) ensured for the future" by free trade than by protectionism. What leader would be willing to do that today?

然而，最重要的教训是领导力方面。皮尔曾反对废除《谷物法》，但在面临危机时，为了做正确的事，他愿意分裂自己的政党甚至丢掉自己的工作。在接下来的30年里分裂的保守党很少掌权。皮尔在回忆录中写道，重要的是“整个社会”以及自由贸易是否能比保护主义“更好地保证未来的廉价和富足”。今天有哪个领导人愿意这样做呢？

来源：经济学人

参与评论

共有 0 条评论

1 2 3 4