Are the duties on the left? If even American democrats make (indeed, they did) cheering for rates

(This article was taken from the press review first now. If you want to register, click here)

The calmness of the response of American Democrats to the escalation of the duties has been noticed these days, now become a swing, imposed by Donald Trump. While the cries of the landed of most of the democratic electorate were raised, but also of part of the republican establishmentThe deputy Chris Deluzio, of Pennsylvania, posed an ambiguous video in which he said: «The duties are a powerful tool. They can be strategically used, but they can also be used improperly ».

The out of place aplomb

Strange, say Jonathan Chait of Atlantic. Just as Trump made the most huge error that can cost him the consent of the second term, the Democrats replied with an out of place aplomb, an incongruent moderation compared to the historical moment. But it is no coincidence that it is shyness. Just look what Joe Biden did: he kept 300 billion dollars of imposed duties From Trump in his first term on Chinese products and has even increased some rates. Then he refused to relaunch the transpacific partnership, which was Obama’s attempt to create a free trade area alternative to China.

The Democratic Party split

The truth is that the Democratic Party on the theme has divided for a long time. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have always been in favor of free trade like the Nafta, unlike Biden. The push to the duties came above all from the progressive wing and the unions, which attribute to the free market the responsibility for the wage drop in the manufacturing sector. According to Alex Thompson, by axiosthere are large sectors of the Democratic Party who have seen the duties as a way to regain the vote of the working class. And several progressives of Rust Belt (the north-east of the USA, once the home of the heavy industry) have expressed some form of support for Trump’s duties. The United Authed Workers union stigmatized the « free trade disaster that hit a bomb on the working class ».
«The problem is not the duties, in general. It is the way Trump is applying them, « says the deputy Hillary Scholtenwhich comes from Michigan, a state that depends heavily on automotive production.

Zombie economists

The same Deluzio mentioned before, last month had written an editorial in which he said: « We must free ourselves from the horde of zombies of neoliberal economists, who have been wrong for decades, who claim that all rates are negative». Rahm Emanuel, former head of Barack Obama staff, is in favor of China’s duties: « We must increase them aggressively ». The deputy Jared Golden, from Maine, proposed rates for all 10 percent.

Sanders’ position

Bernie Sanders’ position is interesting. One of the very few democratic leaders to have raised the voice against Trump with great clarity, also obtaining a good popular mobilization. Still, his words on the duties are inconsistent. First he remembers having been against free trade agreements. Then he says: «We need commercial policies who favor American workersnot only the managing directors of large companies. And this includes targeted duties, which can be a powerful tool to prevent companies from relocating American jobs and factories abroad. In conclusion: we need a rational commercial policy, well weighted and fair ».

Confused messages

Trump’s crazy escalation is recompacting the party, as has happened in the past. The voices that invite you to avoid sophisms and distinctions multiply. Writing Political that « that of the duties is the last example of how Trump has resolved the conflicts of the Democratic Party. During his first term, the Democrats in Capitol Hill were largely agreed in disapproving his policies on immigration and taxes, despite the internal disagreements ». Deluzio, with his definition of duties as « a powerful tool », has created many internal controversies and some confusion in the electorate. The deputy Ritchie Torres, an hour later, published a warning: « We Democrats we have to report the use that Trump makes duties as a weapon to devastate the American economy. Confused and insipid messages only feed Trump’s madness ».

The problem remains of understanding if the duties can be, if used in a targeted way, a left instrument. And moreover, even on the right there was a reversal in front: populist protectionism completely supplanted the theorists of the right that praised Reagan and neoliberal globalization. The upside down world. If the right has become post -liberal, the left is confused and forced by Trump to enhance the free market. The suspicion of some is that the American president had the courage to challenge a globalism which rewarded the exploitation more than the production, and which made the multinationals grow dramatically, making the dirty work that the left was unable to do. The identity closure – within the markets and traditions and outside the treaties and international agreements – leads to a sovereign populism that the left cannot share. But the fight against China and its containers unites everyone, from Trump to Biden to Sanders.