Donald Trump Creates Mix of Economic Nationalism and Liberalism

Published in Folha de São Paulo
(Brazil) on 5 May 2019
by Marina Dias (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Alessandra Guetti. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.

 

 

Opponents and allies criticize Trump’s form of impromptu governing.

Donald Trump reversed the logic of traditional politics when he decided to run for the White House. He ran the 2016 presidential campaign shouting that American interests should come first, and that immigrants and free trade agreements would not matter in his government.

On the contrary, Trump’s protectionist speeches contradicted some historically liberal aspects of the Republican Party and anticipated the difficulty of categorizing Trump as someone who followed any doctrine other than his own.

In the White House, the president has put economic nationalism and interventionist measures into practice, which has moved him away from classical liberalism. However, according to experts, Trump’s administration does not completely reject a philosophy that emerged in Europe and the United States in the 19th century.

“There is the American liberalism, which advocates for a bigger and more active government, and the European classical liberalism, which advocates for more personal and economic freedom. I can see elements of both in Trump,” says political analyst Michael Barone of the American Enterprise Institute.*

Two of Trump’s main pushes — the now failed wall along the border between the U.S. and Mexico, and the trade war with China — are concrete examples of efforts that go far beyond what liberals believe.

But Trump’s first congressional victory — the approval of tax reform in 2017 — flirts with the liberal values of tax reduction.

“Trump’s measures in trade and immigration policy are in tension with the classical liberalism, but I do not see nationalism as opposed to liberalism,” says Barone.*

The assessment is endorsed by Paula Tufro of the Atlantic Council, who believes that it is possible for a nationalist to advocate for free trade and a free market, although this is not the case with Trump.

“In American history, there are presidents who have chosen to act unilaterally, but what is different now is the willingness to end multilateral mechanisms,” Tufro said.*

Trump has already spoken out against NAFTA, the free trade agreement signed by the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, and withdrawn the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Paris climate agreement.

Despite following the logic of tax cuts, Trump’s tax reform favored the richest in order to create jobs and investments in the United States.

“The idea was not only to reduce taxes but to make it easier for companies to repatriate profits,” says Monica de Bolle of the Peterson Institute. “For a multinational company, liberalism means to allow investments in the most attractive places. The American tax policy has tried to reverse the logic so companies would reinvest in the country. This is interventionism.”*

But it is not as if Trump relies on methods or doctrines to exercise power. One of the main criticisms from his opponents and allies is his way of impromptu governing.

“He sees an opportunity and makes a decision on a case-by-case basis,” says Tufro.

*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, the source of this quoted remark could not be independently verified.


Donald Trump cria mescla de nacionalismo econômico e liberalismo
Adversários e aliados criticam sua forma de governar no improviso

Donald Trump inverte a lógica da política tradicional desde que decidiu disputar a Casa Branca.

Atravessou a campanha de 2016 vociferando que interesses americanos deveriam estar sempre em primeiro lugar e que imigrantes e acordos de livre-comércio não teriam importância no seu governo.

Muito pelo contrário: a retórica protecionista contrariava aspectos historicamente liberais do Partido Republicano e antecipava a dificuldade de encaixar Trump como seguidor de uma doutrina que não fosse a dele mesmo.

Na Casa Branca, o presidente colocou em prática o nacionalismo econômico, com medidas intervencionistas que o afastaram do liberalismo clássico.

Segundo especialistas, porém, sua gestão não exclui completamente a filosofia que surgiu na Europa e nos EUA no século 19.

"Existe o liberalismo americano, isto é, defensor de um governo maior e mais ativo, e o clássico europeu, que defende mais liberdade pessoal e econômica. Posso ver elementos de ambos em Trump", afirma o analista político Michael Barone, do American Enterprise Institute.

Duas de suas principais investidas, o por ora fracassado muro na fronteira dos EUA com o México e a guerra comercial com a China, são exemplos concretos que passam longe do que acreditam os liberais.

Já a primeira vitória de Trump no Congresso —a aprovação de uma reforma tributária em 2017— flerta com valores liberais de redução dos impostos.

"Medidas de Trump no comércio e na política imigratória estão em tensão com o liberalismo clássico, mas não vejo o nacionalismo como oposto ao liberalismo", diz Barone.

A avaliação é endossada por Paula Tufro, do Atlantic Council, para quem é possível um nacionalista defender o livre-comércio e o livre-mercado, apesar de este não ser o caso de Trump.

"Na história americana há presidentes que escolheram agir unilateralmente, mas o diferente agora é a disposição de acabar com mecanismos multilaterais."

Trump já falou contra o Nafta, bloco formado por EUA, México e Canadá, e tirou o país do TPP (Tratado de Associação do Transpacífico)e do Acordo de Paris.

Apesar de seguir a lógica de corte de impostos, sua reforma tributária privilegiou os mais ricos, com objetivo de criar empregos e investimentos nos EUA.

"A ideia não era só reduzir tributos, mas tornar mais fácil para empresas repatriarem lucros", diz Monica DeBolle, do Peterson Institute. "Para uma multinacional, o liberalismo é permitir investimento nos lugares mais atraentes. A política fiscal americana tentou inverter a lógica para que empresas voltassem a investir no país. Não deixa de ser um intervencionismo."

Mas não é que Trump se baseie em métodos ou doutrinas para exercer poder. Uma das principais críticas de adversários e aliados é justamente sua forma de governar no improviso.

"Ele vê uma oportunidade e toma a decisão, caso por caso", diz Tufro.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Poland: Ukraine Is Still Far from Peace. What Was Actually Decided at the White House?

Canada: Minnesota School Shooting Is Just More Proof That America Is Crazed

Germany: The President and His Private Army

Topics

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Related Articles

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade