xin has lost interest in talking intellectually about universal human rights 'simply in virtue of being human'. xin has delved into the more practical realm of international political realm and feeling very perplexed at the intricate realities of the real world. yes. the real world.

xin has stupidly, for curiousity's sake, picked an extremely difficult question for a person with no economic background and very little knowledge about global economy (but xin thought it would make good revision for exams anyway?) xin picked a historical question.

xin can't remember the question.
something like: how well does the mercantilist approach explain the post-war international political economic development?

Xin's History of Mercantilism
Adam Smith, our favourite Scottish (all Scottish things are our favourite things) supposedly free-trade - we might discuss that some other time - but just remember, supposedly free-trade, guy, talked about the mercantile system, relating it to merchant activities of the 16-17th century. BASICALLY, mercantilists believe in national interest, and according to Smith anw, beggar-thy-neighbour policies. THe world economy is a zero-sum game, and if you lose, I win =D yay! in the past, what states did was to export as much as possible (hence earning foreign, or as HObbes would say, Forraign, money) and import as little as possible (hence preventing the outflow of money!) And money in those times, tended to refer to precious metals like GOLD! cos gold is durable and rare... that will work, except every other (European anyway) state was doing the same, so what they brilliantly did, was to invade! Massive Expansion into the South and went into a mad, rapacious dash to colonize as much as they possibly can. Sure, there was short-term economic expenses, but in return, (they thought) they received long-term power and economic gains. so they exploit all our (speaking on behalf of my fellow colonialised people) natural wealths and they sell as much manufactured goods (which they produce using our raw materialS) to us as possible.

At least until our beloved Adam Smith came along... He says free trade is gain for all! Stop your silly unnecessary warfare and TRADE! He spent a majority of his The Wealth of Nations denouncing mercantilistic policies. And so we believed him... until the World Wars!

The world became a mess of self-interested, paranoid states who only wanted to protect themselves, usually at the expense of others =) Then the Allies and the US thought: why not form an institution so we can coordinate our policies once more. and to cushion domestic fears about economic troubles, we can have domestic autonomy coupled with free international trade. While Smith says, just let the market govern everything, the postwar leaders reasoned states will take part if they feel they can at least have control over their own states' welfare. Thus, the Bretton Woods convention... and this is where my essay will have to begin o_O

Xin knows that her history sense is rather... appalling, shall we say... Xin just hopes she'll survive this essay and not do too badly. Anyone? Anyone at all who's brilliant at economics and want to discuss Mercantilism (or Neo-mercantilism) with me, please contribute =( i don't know how, to be honest.. since my chatterbox is dead as usual.

xin wonders if her human rights essay sounded much more professional than this.
Guess I'm just not cut out for Economics...