Collapse of the US car industry - don't mention Free Trade policies

A short piece on the possible collapse of the American automotive industry on the Today programme failed to mention America’s suicidal Free Trade policy. It mentioned globalisation, possible bad decision-making from the big three manufacturers on the issue of fuel consumption; but it failed to mention that the tariffs of Asian manufacturers are consistently higher than those of the United States. With a lack of a level playing field, then one by one American – and European – industries will die away leaving the Western World de-industrialised, impoverished and militarily unable to defend ourselves. But hooray! maybe we’ll achieve our climate change targets? Think of the plaudits from all those EU and UN agencies, not to mention global climate change campaigners like George Monbiot.

This is an area where the West must think strategically about its long-term interests. The all-pervasive ideology of global internationalism, the baleful influence of which can be seen in climate change targets, mass immigration, free trade and outsourcing, even the War on Terror, is the great distraction: it prevents us seeing clearly and safeguarding our own interests. This crosses left and right boundaries because the internationalist left has made an alliance with a big business sector, which recognises no loyalty to any country, only its own profits.

Defenders of Free Trade said that only low-tech industries like textiles would go abroad, the West would keep high-tech industries; now we see computers and sophisticated electronics are manufactured in China, the US Car industry is collapsing. Our competitors have high tariffs while ours are low; unless the West raises its tariffs in response, the Asian countries will continue to ignore our protestations about Free Trade and the Global Good, and keep trading with an unfair advantage. Why should they do otherwise, if we don’t take reasonable measures to defend our interests? The reason we keep our tariffs low is due confusion between our interests and the supposed interests of the global community, a misplaced belief that a lack of trade barriers leads to greater security and long-term prosperity. Note how free traders, when pressed about the benefits or lack of benefits to the West, end up saying that it lifts millions of people in the third world out of poverty – i.e. it is good for the world (they say), if not for us. This is at best only partially true. The fact that China keeps targeting its industrial output towards export to the West rather than their own consumers is detrimental to their own people, but good for the country’s long-term quest for hegemony over the United States. Moreover, the dependence of China on our debt-fuelled consumption means that their people are now losing their jobs because of our lack of finance; if they had been less export-dependent, the pain for Chinese workers would be less than it is going to be. Limited trade is good, too much trade will lead to greater volatility.