15 Comments
User's avatar
David Locke's avatar

What if Trump's tariffs never had anything to do with protecting American industry, at all? What if they were in fact a vehicle for a Trump extortion scheme, wherein he planned to extract concessions from foreign governments whose industries were under pressure, by enticing them with a removal of the very same tariffs he installed in the first place?

Expand full comment
Kenny Easwaran's avatar

He also does it to extract concessions from domestic purchasers!

Expand full comment
Marcus Seldon's avatar

I think Trump sincerely believes in tariffs, he’s been vocally advocating for them since the ‘80s, long before entering politics. He just has incoherent and uninformed macroeconomic views.

Of course, they’re also a vehicle for his corruption, but I don’t think it’s purely that for him.

Expand full comment
spenlo's avatar

Exactly... JD is getting rich selling off farming operations. Trump has no policy. He just does what enriches him.

Expand full comment
Ken Kovar's avatar

That’s part of it for sure, look at Brazil and his buddy Balsonaro 🤨

Expand full comment
Miles's avatar

"Yes and", perhaps... I think the industrial workers are the ones who want protectionism, but the tech workers want globalization. So it is not just the bosses - the voters themselves might be getting the different policies they want...

Expand full comment
Jerusalem Demsas's avatar

This is an interesting point! Notably the protectionist tech-workers are more concerned with being anti-immigration than trade protectionism (which makes a narrow sort of sense)

Expand full comment
Ken Kovar's avatar

This is another instance of TACO in action: Trump always chickens out 🙂

Expand full comment
RenOS's avatar

Yeah, to be honest I think the simplest explanation is still the best one. Tariffs are among Trump's biggest, possibly only, ideological preferences (everything else is best described as "I don't care as long as I'm on top"). And, for understanding, as far as I see he isn't against free trade per se, but against what he perceives unfair trade policy (though his definition of unfair is rather wide). But he is also a populist and wants a strong economy. Taken together, he starts out with significant tariffs but gets easily spooked by the stock markets and talked into this or that cut-out by industry lobbyists.

Expand full comment
Susan Clark Muntean's avatar

The hidden explanatory or causal variable is the principal owners who actually are the puppeteers-the broligarchy techno owners of tech capital and financial investment (hedge funds, VC, blockholder founders of largest AI firms creating the massive AI (and crypto bubble) run economic “policy”

Expand full comment
Kenny Easwaran's avatar

If they ran economic policies there wouldn’t be stupid tariffs on everything else. They aren’t stupid.

Expand full comment
Mike Moschos's avatar

From the perspective of myself and the USA's Old Republic, the author here (not trying to knock him, BTW) writes without mentioning that the United States of the 1930s operated under an entirely different institutional brain than the post-1970s system that developed over the post WW2 transformation decades. For example, his statement re “the highest tariffs since the 1930s” assumes continuity where there is very little, the 1930s existed within the last decades of the Old Republic’s decentralized, diffused capital with pluralistic capital formation and structures, federated decision making architecture, etc; today’s tariffs exist inside a fully financialized, deeply legally and regulatory harmonized (via central direction), globally integrated technocratic order whose operating logic is the opposite of that earlier world. He does get at how just one policy's effect cannot be considered without looking at all the rest of policies, BUT, he does not get at how a policy effects cannot be compared across entirely different decision making architectures, he treats tariffs in 1930 and 2025 as if they were equivalent instruments producing equivalent meanings.

And quites ironically, even if Trump has no coherent doctrine, the author is correct, one way or another. Trump’s AI carve-outs, his willingness to empower Nvidia and Sacks as de facto planners, and his obsession with stock-market optics in a deeply centralized financial system, all amount to a continuation of deep consolidation and intensive economic central planning, albeit in chaotic, factionalized form. In structural terms, this is simply another version of capital "G" Globalization’s core logics, so yes, at least in effective terms, either way, he is a “globalist”

Expand full comment
Rick Mandler's avatar

Because it isn’t about free trade/globalism or not. It is about cronyism and corruption. Tariffs are a means for corruption. Free trade makes corruption harder. AI is advantaged because the Mag 7 are providing value to Trump and the Trump Regime.

Expand full comment
Clarissa Sr, American Grandma's avatar

🌟🇺🇸 “When Democracy Wasn’t a Police State”

We remember a time,

not too long ago,

when Main Street could blossom

and small shops could grow.

When government’s message

to neighbors was clear:

“Start up your dream—

we’ll help, not interfere.”

But then came the tariffs,

the taxes in disguise,

that jacked up the prices

on everyday buys.

They rattled our markets,

they rattled our town,

till factories shuttered

and wages fell down.

He picked fights with allies

who’d long stood beside,

where many have family

and kin they still pride.

He snarled at our partners,

he fractured our trust,

turning teamwork to tantrums

and friendship to dust.

Then visas got tangled

in red-tape and fear,

with five years of socials

to sift and to smear.

Tourism suffered,

farms lost their hand,

students and nurses

were stalled at the land.

From boardwalks and diners

to bright concert lights,

the jobs slowly vanished

like stars in bad nights.

It hammered our teachers,

our clinics, our art,

the everyday engines

that once drove our heart.

Yet one line of business

kept growing in size—

more ICE, more informers,

more watchful cold eyes.

Bounty-hunt biceps

and cages and gates,

more boots and more badges,

less hope in our states.

But we, older watchers,

recall something great—

when “democracy”

didn’t mean “police state.”

When laws still had limits,

and rights had a space,

and neighbors felt welcome

in our common place.

So we talk to our children,

we share what we know,

we lift up the voices

that truthfully show

How policies hurt us,

how cruelty spreads—

and how we can choose

better paths instead.

With comments and resharing,

with facts we relate,

we’ll guard the America

that once felt less late.

For a freer tomorrow

is still ours to make—

when we stand up together

for a non–police state. ✨🇺🇸

#ResharingBrigade #GrandparentsForTruth #IndyMedia #ProDemocracy #SupportUkraine #SupportPalestine #SupportAfghanVets

Expand full comment
Rainbow Roxy's avatar

Couldn't agree more. This 'controlled experiment' idea is absolutely brilliant and puts the situation in such sharp relief. It so clearly shows how protectionism can hobble industries while AI thrives with more open approaches. Makes you beleive in thoughtful policy. Thanks for this insightful take!

Expand full comment