Benefits of free trade

Article: We Need Sincere Free Trade
By Johan Norberg (page 101)

Why import from other countries what you can artificially produce at home? If you can grow oranges in Canada in the middle of winter, why not do that? Every location has its advantage, and, according to Johan Norberg, trading without tariffs is beneficial for all. Norberg’s argument is not only set up to show the benefits of free trade, but to convince those who were opposed to free trade prior to reading the article
To begin his argument, Norberg paints a vivid picture that alludes to the problems taxed trade creates. He describes the scenario as such: “On my way back from a recent vacation, I passed by three big sugar mills. There is nothing strange with that-except for the fact that I spent the vacation in southern Sweden…Sweden has a very short summer, the soil is frozen for several months, and the cattle have to be indoors most of the time. Not your ideal place for agriculture, you would think,” (101). Johan Norberg’s use of imagery is a very effective way to open his argument. As the reader, it’s very easy for me to picture myself seeing what is being described. Norberg wants the readers to be appalled by the situation he is describing, and they easily could be. This first paragraph leads directly to the argument that without the European Union protecting its farmers, there is no way that sugar mills would ever be set up in a country as cold and frozen as Sweden.
Because Norberg is a Swedish native, the reader naturally trusts his knowledge on the EU’s protectionist laws. Being the educated man that he is, Norberg knows that his audience will take his argument more seriously if they can trust what he is describing to him. After making this appeal to pathos, Norberg dives straight in to presenting relevant facts and drawing logical conclusions. Although most all of these facts are effective, he does make a few generalizations in his arguments. In the follow up paragraph to his introduction, Norberg states, “Swedish farmers along with others in the European Union enjoy a comfortable lifestyles, at the expense of poor countries in Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America.” This is a generalization because I’m sure not every person (especially farmers) in Western Europe lives a comfortable lifestyle, and not every single person in Eastern Europe, African, or Latin America lives a poor life. Norberg uses this generalization to control the reader’s emotions, and make them feel either angry at rich people for taking away others chances at productivity, or guilty for being one of the rich.
(more to be added here)
To sum up his reasoning, Norberg makes a reference to the U.S.’s previous president, and turns is quote into a rhetorical question meant to stimulate the reader, get them to really thing about all the facts they have been presented with, and hopefully get willing to do something about it. Quoted from George W. Bush, the passage reads, “Perhaps America needs a presidential candidate like the one who in 2000, said, ‘I intend to work to end barriers and tariffs everywhere so that the entire world trades in freedom’…That candidate was George W. Bush. Where did he go?” This rhetorical question was crafted to make people upset at the situation, and get them to research more on the EU tariffs.