...share with you how ridiculous I was. This is my last undergraduate research paper...
Christina J. Lee (ID# ********)
(removed class & professor name)
15 June 2009 (note: this was the week after finals...submitted ridiculously late)
NAFTA: Another Good Idea Gone Bad
With the passing of the North American Free Trade Agreement, various legitimate sources were quick to publish articles praising the NAFTA and the benefits that all participating parties would share. In an article published in July of 1992, The New York Times claimed that this agreement “promised jobs, wealth, and economic activity throughout the continent.” In September of the following year, it was said in the Washington Post that “the list of new opportunities and advantages is a long one.” Regardless of the praises the NAFTA has received over the years, only time would tell whether such claims would come to fruition or not. Looking back over these fifteen years that have trickled by, it is undeniable that the NAFTA has hugely impacted the continent and its economic goings on. Unfortunately, the changes that have come to pass are overwhelmingly negative, and these destructive consequences are not only limited to the economic realm. NAFTA and its results have been so potent that they have poisoned everything from the environment and foreign relations to the daily lives of hardworking individuals. But the initial praises of NAFTA could not have been completely unfounded, and it was an agreement that had been signed by leaders who are hoped to have had the best intentions of their people and nations at heart. With that in mind, one cannot help but wonder—what exactly is it that went wrong? If the Washington Post’s sentiments in believing that the NAFTA could bring about great opportunities and advantages were echoed as they were, chances are that the agreement started out as something to be looked upon with hope from all over the continent. It could be said that the details of NAFTA were simply shortsighted, and that its failures could not have been predicted, rendering the avoidance of such negative consequences impossible from the start. Still others have said that it was xenophobia that helped get the NAFTA passed, and that it is this xenophobia that caused NAFTA to ultimately crumble and fail (Faux). Though these points are valid, they do not quite reach down to the basic root of why NAFTA failed. Whether it is shortsightedness or xenophobia, it all boils down to the fact that NAFTA failed because man is inherently sinful.
Before the sinful nature of man can be pinned for the failure of NAFTA, the term “sin” must first be defined. According to The American Heritage dictionary, sin is either “a transgression of a religious or moral law” or “something shameful or wrong.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary says that sin can also be defined as “an often serious shortcoming.” While these definitions are what most people would most commonly think of in an attempt to define so abstract a term, they are inadequate for the purposes of defining man’s inherent sinfulness. The Merriam-Webster definition is probably the most secular definition in the sense that it causes sin to appear as something that can be helped and that it is apart from the norm. The word “shortcoming” implies that sin is a character fault that individuals deal with on a case-by-case basis and that it is not an ever-present malady of the soul, and does little to shed light on the inherency of sin. Ironically, Merriam-Webster also provides the definition of sin that is most closely aligned with the Protestant worldview. Sin is “ a vitiated state of human nature in which the self is estranged from God.” In other words, sin is not just an isolated action or a mistake someone makes every once in a while; it is a state of being. But this is not a state of being that only afflicts a select group of people—no individual is exempt because sin as a state of human nature is inherent in all men.
According to Romans 5:12 in the New International Version of the Bible, “sin entered the world through one man” whose name was Adam. Advocates and believers of creationism believe that Adam was the first man to be created, according to Genesis 1:7. As it is detailed in the beginning verses of Genesis, before sin and corruption entered the world the earth and all its inhabitants existed in peace and without hardship. This peace and simplicity of life could be attributed to the fact that Adam and his wife Eve lived with childlike innocence. Countless parents can attest to the fact that at one time or another, their children have run around naked in utter joy because they simply have no idea that they should be covering up. It is even emphasized in Genesis 1:25 that “they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” Shame and all things negative entered the world as a result of the fall. The garden in which Adam and Eve resided contained what was known as the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the only thing that God had forbade the couple to eat from (Genesis 1:17). Unfortunately, the devil in serpent form tempts Eve and she eventually gives in, taking from the tree and even giving it to her husband. True to its name, the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil opened the eyes of those who partook of it, and the first thing the couple did was to cover themselves up in shame. Ultimately, all parties involved are cursed as a result of this transgression—it is the combination of the transgression and subsequent curse that caused man to exist in a state of hardship, turmoil, and of course, sin.
Sin is most comprehensively defined as a human state of being, but its consequences and manifestations are what people generally believe to be sin. To define it simply, the manifestations of sin can be summed up into one general category—that of self-centeredness. It is only fitting that this is the case, considering the fact that it was a matter of selfish ambition and desire that caused Eve to eat of the forbidden fruit. The serpent played on her self-centeredness when he said in Genesis 3:5 that “God knows that in the day [she eats of the fruit her] eyes will be opened, and [she] will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Even what has become known as the seven deadly sins, lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride, can be linked back to a general sense of self-centeredness. All of these have to do with fulfilling one’s pleasures and desires without regard toward others and their well being.
So how does any of this relate back to how NAFTA failed? From here my goal was to detail the promises that people welcomed with the passing of the agreement, from getting rid of tariffs to providing more jobs. Opening up Mexico’s economy meant that US companies could invest in expanding their businesses south of the border while helping to boost Mexico’s economic growth, and economic growth meant that more people would choose to stay in Mexico. The NAFTA would make winners out of everyone involved. As we know, the fact of the matter is that in the end, the only winners were on the American side. Illegal immigrants still flood over north of the border, and workers are exploited to maximize profit. I was hoping to detail the ways in which NAFTA failed in regards to Mexico’s economy, immigration, exploitation, and the environment. My argument is that all of these things can be attributed back to the self-centeredness so characteristic of man’s sinful human nature. Exploiting workers and the environment are obviously manifestations of man’s greed. To explore why exactly exploiting works could be considered a sin…Treating workers on a subpar level goes against the command for us to love our neighbors as ourselves, as stated several times throughout the Bible—Luke 10:27 being one of the verses off the top of my head. One thing I find ironic about that command is that God is being practical—technically we’re supposed to love God above all else, as we are commanded not to have any idols before Him according to the first commandment (found in Exodus). But the reality is that we fail at loving God more than anything else, and we love ourselves and put ourselves at the top of our priority lists. This is why it’s such a beautiful thing when we are selfless and are willing to serve others, whether it is out of humanitarian wishes or of a genuine love and care for others. Ruining the environment isn’t quite as obvious a sin as treating other people like trash. The argument here is that we have been charged from the beginning of time with the creation of Adam to take care of God’s creation. Clearly, this command is being ignored and neglected for the sake of financial gain. These are just a couple of examples of how man’s sinful nature can be blamed for NAFTA’s failure.
The solution to this failure is not an easy one, because there really isn’t one. As man’s sinful nature is inherent, it’s obviously something we will never really be rid of. But our hope comes with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In the Old Testament times, before Christ descended, the Israelites were forced to sacrifice unblemished animals in order to atone for their sins. Unfortunately, these animals only counted for so much and sacrifices had to be made on a regular basis because people would always sin as a result of their own state of sin. So when Christ came, He became what is now understood to be the ultimate sacrifice. He led a life untarnished by sinful human nature, never transgressing any moral or religious law as ordained by God and even His supernatural birth (detailed in the first four books of the New Testament) allowed Him to rise above the muck of human sinfulness. Man’s blood was the only sufficient blood that would atone for the sins of all mankind. In Romans 5:12 it is said that just as sin entered the world through one man, it would leave the world through one man. Jesus, as both man and both God, was enough to fully cover the sins of all men. That said, the only solution to this NAFTA problem would be to share the gospel with everyone and all work together toward the same goals of loving God, loving our neighbors, and living with the eternal perspective in mind. As I stated earlier, such a task is pretty much impossible. Therefore, I really don't know how we could remedy this failure in a practical way…which is why I’m choosing not to do anything related to political science now that I’ve completed my BA in Political Science. If anything, poli sci has opened my eyes to see the hopeless depravity of mankind and how much we all really do need Jesus.
My apologies for how this paper turned into a sermon-like essay. Initially I’d been really excited to write about something I truly believe in and care about for the first and last time ever in my life, but at this point I really can’t seem to find the drive to shape my thoughts into a neatly organized research paper. I hope that this was all at least somewhat interesting to you, even though it’s poorly written and isn’t thorough enough. I wanted to just give up and send you what I had finished, but I figured I should at least go through and explain what exactly it was that I wanted to argue. I know I’ve already given you a thank you card, but truly, thank you for helping me through this quarter. If this paper isn’t enough to boost my grade a few points to a passing level, that’s okay. I’ve messed up, and I understand I have to deal with the consequences. Thank you, professor. I wish you the best of luck and hopefully one day our paths will cross again.
You can ask me directly what I got on this paper/in this class--I'm not posting it here.
