… when shown plainly and irrefutably the illogic and economic ignorance that beat in the very heart of his case for protectionism, rather than abandon that illogical and ignorant case, adds yet another layer of illogic to his argument. He does so by illogically merely asserting that his case is neither illogical nor economically ignorant. And he frequently piles his illogic even higher by adding on a few ad hominem arguments against those who use reason and evidence to expose the many fallacies in the case for protectionism.
Being illogical and uninformed, the protectionist cannot hope to persuade those who are logical and informed that the people of a country are made richer when their access to resources, goods, and services is artificially restricted. Being illogical and uninformed, the protectionist has no hope of constructing a sound argument that greater wealth springs from greater scarcity and that greater abundance means greater privation. Being illogical and uninformed, the protectionist’s only hope of winning allies in his battle against abundance is to encounter people who are as illogical and as uninformed as he is, and then somehow to convince them to swallow the fallacious notions that logic is irrelevant and that economic analysis is on the protectionist’s side.
