Seven years in the past, I strode via the lengthy black-and-white corridors of the White Home’s Government Workplace of the President to a room occupied by Peter Navarro, adviser to the then president Donald Trump.
Navarro’s desk was buried beneath piles of paper. “I’m always messy,” the economist laughed, and offered a 140-page report with an American flag on the quilt titled “Assessing and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain Resiliency of the United States”. This asserted that the US had turn into dangerously reliant on abroad suppliers for important items and thus wanted industrial insurance policies and commerce controls.
“That’s a bit retro,” I joked. The final time such language had proliferated was throughout and after the second world struggle, when the American authorities tried to form enterprise to nationwide ends. In peacetime, arguably the one comparable second was the explosion of protectionism world wide that adopted the Wall Avenue crash of 1929.
That episode ended so badly that by the late Twentieth century, industrial coverage and tariffs appeared as retro as flappers. The corridors of the EOP had been stuffed with officers with a free-market, pro-globalisation ethos, who typically seen commerce via the lens of the classical economist David Ricardo (1772-1823). Their assumption was that open commerce advantages all: nations export items to earn cash to pay for imports, and if every specialises in areas of comparative benefit, then everybody is best off.
“Ricardo is dead!” Navarro replied, earlier than launching right into a diatribe towards America’s extra mainstream economists — and the Monetary Instances, which Navarro’s buddy, the rightwing agitator Steve Bannon, appreciated to say was akin to the church e-newsletter of a faith they needed to overturn. I identified that the criticism was mutual.
Navarro shrugged. “You and the other FT writers will eventually know that I am right — you’ll see!” I walked out, report in hand, my heels clacking on the marble flooring.
Quick-forward seven years, and that change nonetheless rings in my thoughts — with new significance. This month Trump will likely be put in because the forty seventh president of the US. Navarro will return to that EOP constructing to behave as senior counsellor for commerce and manufacturing — a double comeback for a person who served a four-month jail sentence in Miami final yr for contempt of Congress, imposed after he refused at hand over notes or testify earlier than a Home of Representatives choose committee on the US Capitol assault of January 6 2021.
Not is the talk round commerce performed in Ricardian phrases, as Alan Wolff, former deputy director-general of the WTO, acknowledges. “One hundred sixty-six nations joined the World Trade Organization and pledged not to use tariffs as a weapon,” he wrote in a current memo, noting individually that since 1950 international commerce has elevated 4,400 per cent, driving heady progress.
However now, he provides, “there has been a paradigm shift in policy”. Trump is threatening to slap tariffs of 25 per cent on supposedly pleasant nations reminiscent of Mexico and Canada, and the WTO’s authority has all however crumbled. The concepts promoted by males reminiscent of Navarro and Bannon, in different phrases, have gone from fringe to centre stage.
To know these developments it’s value Navarro’s back-story, since that is extremely symbolic. Born in 1949, the son of a musician and a secretary, he got here from a technology that needed to embrace the world. After finding out at Tufts, he labored for the peace corps in Thailand after which did a PhD in economics at Harvard within the Eighties.
This was the interval when Ronald Reagan was unleashing a neoliberal financial motion that held up minimal state intervention, deregulation, free commerce and low taxes because the recipe for progress. And when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, it appeared that free markets, democracy and globalisation had triumphed. Historical past had not fairly come to an finish, to quote the well-known ebook by Francis Fukuyama, but it surely appeared to be getting into a straight line in the direction of extra globalisation and liberalisation.
Navarro’s work echoed this, to a point. He studied provide and demand in American vitality markets, predicting (precisely) that there could be electrical energy blackouts, after which taught economics on the College of California, Irvine, writing a 2001 ebook about investing in globalised markets known as If It’s Raining in Brazil, Purchase Starbucks. “[Navarro] was orthodox and liberal back then,” recollects Glenn Hubbard, a Republican-supporting economist who was in the identical Harvard PhD cohort. Seeds of Destruction, a 2010 ebook he co-wrote with Navarro, was at pains to level out that the latter supported the Democrats.
However Navarro’s views had been altering. “It was in 2003 when I began to notice two particular trends,” he recalled in Taking Again Trump’s America, revealed in 2022. One was that his college students had been dropping their jobs; the opposite was that they had been now not being sponsored by corporations to do MBAs. He investigated and concluded that the basis trigger was China’s admission to the WTO in 2001, which had enabled the nation to seize “huge chunks of global market share”.
Had been Ricardo alive, he may need identified that American shoppers had been additionally benefiting from cheaper items — some extent that issues, since Ricardo’s love of free commerce was influenced by his hatred of how English Nineteenth-century oligarchs used the so-called Corn Legal guidelines to rig costs. Extra particularly, he needed to abolish the Corn Legal guidelines to let items be priced in line with demand and inspired nations to give attention to their areas of strategic benefit to additional decrease prices — say, England swapping its exports of wool for Portuguese wine.
However Navarro concluded that with China within the WTO it was now unattainable to create the kind of degree enjoying discipline that Ricardo had needed, as a result of Beijing had rigged the system. “America, the piggy bank, will continue to be plundered by a trade deficit that transfers more than half a trillion dollars of American wealth a year into foreign hands . . . [through] industrial espionage, rampant cheating, intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer, state capitalism and currency misalignments,” he later advised college students at Harvard. “It’s long past time for the ivory tower to reimagine and re-engineer its models of trade!”
Unsurprisingly, economists in that “ivory tower” — at Harvard and elsewhere — bristled. One purpose was that China’s function in international manufacturing appeared to have made it extra environment friendly. One other was that many economists blamed automation — not China — for the lack of jobs. They believed, too, that insofar as low-cost imports had been creating a big commerce deficit for America, this was offset by flows of cash. Extra particularly, the Chinese language used the {dollars} earned from exports to purchase belongings reminiscent of Treasury bonds.
Navarro’s imaginative and prescient of commerce additionally appeared out of step with Twenty first-century enterprise. In Ricardo’s day, this was primarily concerning the bilateral change of products — say, wool for wine. Now it’s formed by companies and digital operations that transcend nationwide borders. The motion of products is extraordinarily complicated: when Apple makes iPhones, say, it makes use of provide chains that contain 43 nations, whereas elements from a “made in America” automotive can cross the Mexican border seven or eight occasions over the course of the manufacturing course of.
However unease with neoliberalism was rising. Way back to 1999, progressive protests had erupted in Seattle, when leftwing activists disrupted a ministerial assembly of the WTO to precise their anger towards globalisation, which they blamed for rising inequality and environmental hurt. By the early 2000s, such issues had fed into the Environmental, Social and Governance motion, influencing centrists too. “Some of us started to realise that we were just not paying enough attention to the people left behind [by globalisation and technological change],” says Hubbard, whose 2022 ebook The Wall and the Bridge known as for a give attention to stakeholders, not simply shareholders and income.
Then these concepts unfold among the many group of rightwing politicians who would later coalesce across the Make America Nice Once more motion. Way back to the Eighties, Trump had been cautious of free commerce. However after Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, drew his consideration to Navarro’s books, he turned much more alarmed about China. So did Bannon, the self-styled “nationalist populist”. When Trump received the 2016 election, he began to show his protectionist rhetoric into actuality, slapping tariffs on China in areas reminiscent of metal and forcing the renegotiation of commerce offers.
This was a shock for neoliberals. However what was much more hanging was that even after Trump misplaced the 2020 election to Joe Biden, the mental pendulum continued to swing. In opposition, Biden had railed towards Trump’s protectionist and xenophobic rhetoric. However as soon as he entered the White Home himself, he retained lots of the Trump tariffs — and added some new ones. He additionally formulated a imaginative and prescient of commercial coverage — Bidenomics — that, sarcastically, echoes themes about supply-chain safety discovered within the “retro” report that Navarro had offered to me in 2018 within the EOP constructing.
And Biden was not alone. Final April, the IMF famous that there had been 2,500 industrial coverage measures recorded amongst its members in 2023 — of which two-thirds had been trade-distorting. “Now, industrial policy appears to be back everywhere,” it noticed, noting that whereas such insurance policies was once restricted to small growing nations, in 2023 “China, the European Union, and the United States accounted for almost half of all new measures”.
Why? The IMF blamed “the pandemic, heightened geopolitical tensions, and the climate crisis [which] raised concerns about the resilience of supply chains”, together with rising unease “about the ability of markets to allocate resources efficiently”. Future historians may also cite voter anger in the direction of elites as a consequence of stagnating incomes.
There’s one other solution to body this shift: the previous twenty years have pressured us all to recognise the bounds of the economist’s craft. Within the late Twentieth century, amid the rise of free-market concepts and an explosion of computing energy that facilitated the creation of complicated mathematical fashions, the self-discipline usually appeared like a sort of quantitative policymaking priesthood. This was an period when Homo economicus appeared to rule. Commerce flows had been presumed to create peace, present virtually in a sphere outdoors politics.
Nevertheless, any financial mannequin is barely nearly as good as its “inputs”, and these fashions have been repeatedly overturned by objects that weren’t included within the quantity crunching, reminiscent of medical danger, know-how change, tradition, social battle, environmental points and struggle. The Greeks who created the basis phrase for the self-discipline — oikonomia — wouldn’t have been stunned by this: they seen oikonomia as family or group administration or stewardship. However that was not how neoliberals noticed it: markets had been speculated to take care of themselves. Numbers dominated.
So one solution to perceive the mental shifts at present is that we’re returning to oikonomia. The political proper desires to “manage” nationwide safety; the left desires to “manage” our ecology and social fairness. Both manner, it’s Homo politicus, not Homo economicus, who dominates: commerce is now not “just” about financial exchanges, however energy, significantly of the hegemonic kind. And that’s tipping us again to the early Twentieth-century mentality described by the long-forgotten economist Albert Hirschman in his 1945 ebook Nationwide Energy and the Construction of International Trade, the place it’s presumed that “an increase of wealth through foreign trade leads to an increase of power relative to that of other countries . . . [and] a conflict between the wealth and power aims of the state is well-nigh unthinkable”.
After all, bullying by no means vanished from the world stage; even within the free-market Reagan period, there have been tariff threats. However when nations reminiscent of China tried to bully Australia or South Korea a decade in the past, this tended to be refined. Now it’s overt — and touches not simply items, however cash too. “We estimate that US geoeconomic power relies on financial services, while Chinese power relies on manufacturing,” says Matteo Maggiori, an economist, in a brand new paper he has co-written on these hegemonic energy politics. Or as Wolff places it: “The United States is not the first country in modern times to deploy power as a basis for trade relations, just the first to do so openly.”
So what occurs subsequent? In current weeks, I’ve put that query to some in Trump’s circle. Few will communicate on the document forward of Congressional affirmation hearings, and there are splits between them. Some are eager to downplay Bannon’s and Navarro’s roles as “mere” advisers; the previous, for his half, has been engaged in a confrontation with the tech billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk over H-1B visas for expert staff.
Nevertheless, a number of key themes emerge. One, as Bannon tells me, is that “there is a widespread view in the Maga movement, including senior levels of President Trump’s circle, that neoliberal economics has failed and Ricardian economics is no longer relevant. We are in a populist nationalist fight.”
A second key theme is profound hostility to China, to some extent the place some Trumpians are reluctant to even see Beijing purchase many Treasuries. A 3rd is that if commerce flows are reimagined, finance may also must be, to guard American pursuits; the so-called Bretton Woods system created by western allies in 1944 to form international finance may need to be rethought. Or as Scott Bessent, Treasury secretary nominee, stated in the summertime: “We’re in the midst of a Bretton Woods realignment . . . I’d like to be part of it.”
Fourth, Trump’s acolytes suppose that his political “genius” — as some name it — rests on his potential to behave in unpredictably aggressive ways in which destabilise his rivals. “Why did he attack Canada? It’s partly just sport, to show who is strong and who is in charge,” says one official. And that has a vital implication: we have no idea how a lot of Trump’s rhetoric on commerce — or anything — will flip into actuality.
In any case, in his first time period his bark was usually worse than his chunk, and this time his coverage pledges are riddled with inner contradictions. To offer one instance: if Trump really imposes large-scale tariffs, that is more likely to strengthen the greenback — as Bessent himself has beforehand famous — and will really widen the deficit, which isn’t what Trump says he desires to see. To offer one other: if he does impose tariffs, this might elevate inflation — regardless that he has promised to scale back it.
Or a 3rd contradiction: if Trump places up obstacles in a bid to extend his nation’s energy, this may encourage different nations to commerce extra with one another — round America. Certainly, one hanging element concerning the world in 2025 is that at the same time as teams such because the IMF fret about protectionist rhetoric and trade-distorting insurance policies, most economists anticipate strongish international progress subsequent yr — and for commerce to maintain swelling too. Maybe that is over-optimistic. However many nations and corporations have gotten more proficient at rechannelling provide chains. A research by New York College’s Stern Faculty of Enterprise means that in case you take a look at all of the 4 metrics of globalisation at present — the motion of cash, individuals, data and items — it’s nonetheless close to a document excessive. Simply because America is threatening to turn into isolationist doesn’t imply the entire world is on this path too.
This doesn’t deter Navarro. Removed from it: as he prepares to return to the EOP, he’s wanting to show the critics improper. “Net tariffs will lower the US trade deficit and thereby boost real GDP growth while slowing the transfer of US assets into foreign hands, thereby preserving US wealth,” he tells me after I level to the inconsistencies of Trump’s coverage pledges. “As domestic investment and production increases and supply chains become more stable and resilient, real wages will rise, inflation will fall and our nation will be more secure,” he continues, arguing that “Drill, baby, drill” and diminished regulatory prices will assist battle inflation. “That is the essence of Maganomics.”
Is it insanity? Genius? Or only a signal that historical past — and mental fashions — at all times transfer in pendulum swings? Perhaps historians could have a transparent reply in one other seven years’ time. At present, nonetheless, we are able to solely watch — with unease.
Gillian Tett is a columnist and member of the editorial board for the Monetary Instances
Discover out about our newest tales first — comply with FT Weekend on Instagram and X, and join to obtain the FT Weekend e-newsletter each Saturday morning
