Free trade between nations, or between people?

In response to a comment by John T. Kennedy to this post at The Agitator, "harm" of Ne Quid Nemis writes:

Humbug; this kinda comment, posted @ Balko's own site, is exactly the kinda knee-jerk pseudo-libertarianism that I loathe almost as much as I dislike obtuse bleeding heart rubbish:

[Clinton] signed the free trade agreements GATT (search) and NAFTA (search), for example, and rolled out an initiative to gut federal bureaucratic waste.

Um, what's a "free trade agreement"? How do thousands of pages of regulations add up to free trade

Mr. John T. Kennedy, are you shitting me? Or maybe this was just one of those throw-away lines folks like to mix in, just for yucks? You never know in the Blogosphere. Are we really expecting international trade to voooooooop, & take off w/o even a minimum of governmental supervision & guarantees?

JTK is absolutely correct. Free trade between "nations" is a meaningless concept. Agreements like NAFTA are not necessary for trade to occur between individuals or companies. The only reason that this sort of managed trade agreements are signed is for corporate interests to try to gain leverage over competitors. Trade has been "vooooooooop"ing and "taking off" between people of different nations without the involvement of governments since the beginning of civilization. We don't need a thousand page trade agreement for it to happen.

Share this