This is the first time I have ever written a blog post to comment on a newspaper advertisement, in this case in The Washington Post, on March 6th. I assume that there is no way to link to it. The ad says:
Big Candy’s Greed
[picture of a suit pocket stuffed with cash next to a picture of a farm with a foreclosure sign]
Jeopardizing 142,000 U.S. jobs and America’s food security isn’t a game. It’s a travesty.
So why are Big Candy executives lobbying Congress to outsource America’s sugar production?
To boost their already bloated profit margins at the expense of American farmers, workers and consumers.
Winners: A few corporate executives.
Support Current Sugar Policy–It Works for America
American Sugar Alliance
Backing America’s Beet and Cane Farmers
Why did the trade association executives choose to run this ad? Consider these possiblities:
1. They do not actually believe the oppressor-oppressed narrative they have concocted (to support sugar tariffs, of course), but they think that they can fool people with it and thereby influence policy.
2. They do not believe the narrative will influence policy, but they believe that they can fool the donors who sponsor their organization into thinking that they are getting something valuable for their contributions.
3. Actually, they are not trying to fool anyone with this narrative. In fact, they believe it themselves, even though to everyone else it is transparently ridiculous.
I lean toward (3). When you cash your paycheck from a pure rent-seeking organization, you want to convince yourself that you are actually a good guy, and in the process you make someone else the bad guy.