President Trump is going to impose Mutual tariffs to wipe out April 2nd. The move aims to level the arena between American free enterprises and foreign state-sponsored competitors.
“April 2 will be America's liberation day,” the president said. I hope he literally means that.
Instead of building it, America is buying the future.
The Day of Liberation – a bold declaration of American economic sovereignty – deserves annual approval along with Independence Day. This is why.
Economics and politics – money and power – are inseparable. Without economic independence, such as the ability to produce steel, machinery and semiconductors in the country, political independence cannot survive.
The American founders learned their lessons in difficult ways during the Revolutionary War. Somewhere along the way, the country forgot about it.
Over the past 50 years, the US has taken trillions of dollars in economic production, from basic necessities to advanced technology, everything from foreign competitors. As a result, the US now relies heavily on Chinese imports to maintain wealth and security.
This addiction is not myopic. It's suicide.
President Trump's proposed tariffs provide what is the last best opportunity to free the US economy from grasping globalist trade policies that hollowed out domestic industries.
In the shadow of Rushmore
The biggest threat to the American Revolution was not the disciplined redcoat or the ruthless Hessian. There were no colonies that could not produce enough textiles, firearms or gunpowder to sustain war effort. Before the revolution, Britain was supplying many of these goods.
Winning was only possible after the European powers, particularly France and the Netherlands, began supplying the Continental Army. Only the French provided Over 80,000 musket guns. Without that aid, the war would of course never have been won.
President George Washington understood the harsh lesson. Political independence depends on economic independence. He wrote:
Free people should not only be armed, but also be disciplined. Therefore, a uniform, well-digested plan is required. And their safety and concerns require the need to promote production that tends to be independent of others, especially for military supply…
That's why his first major legislative act as president Tariff Act of 1789taxes were placed on imported manufactured goods. The goal was clear – encouraged domestic industries and reduced dependence on foreign suppliers.
Critics argue that these tariffs may have reduced economic “efficiency,” but they have turned the United States far more resilient politically and militarily. Tariff opponents often forget that America is not an economic work camp. It is a country with value beyond profit margins.
Thomas Jefferson was initially critical of Washington's plans, but the 1812 war took him on board. The United States and the British Empire were once again in war, but this time the United States was able to supply many of its own firearms and textiles despite the British lockdown. in Letters from 1816 Jefferson admitted:
Experience has taught us that manufacturers are independence and need for us to be comfortable. And if the person quoting me in another opinion continues to walk with me when buying a foreigner who can get the equivalent of domestic fabric, regardless of price differences, [we would be well off] …
Throughout the 19th century, American leaders relied on tariffs to build domestic industrial bases from scratch. The 1816 Customs Act unified what was an inconsistent patchwork of tax rates, doubling the average tariff across the board.
High tariffs remained a central part of US economic policy until the 1970s, when protectionist barriers began to decline.
Under this “American system” tariff, the fathers of many founders and all presidents were supported by what was carved on Mount Rushmore, and the United States transitioned from primarily agricultural colonies to industrial powers.
By 1870, the United States was the second largest industrial force in the world, behind only the UK. By the 1880s it produced a quarter of the world's industrial production. This continued to grow. For the next 150 years, the United States led its productivity to the world.
That changed in 2010, when China overtook the United States. Today, the share of America's global industrial product has dropped to around 17%. This is about half of the country's industrial peak.
Ash to ashes, dust to dust
In the 1970s, the United States abandoned its long-standing protectionist policies and embraced economic globalism, including international “free” trade and loose monetary policy. This shift has led to widespread offshoring in factories, a decline in the American industry, and increased economic unrest among the American people. As a result, the country has become increasingly dependent on foreign suppliers, especially China, for essential products.
This economic transformation has made the United States a more “colonial” trade pattern. Since moving away from tariffs, the structure of the American economy has begun to resemble the structure of 13 colonies before the revolutionary war. At the time, Britain locked the colonies into merchantalist relationships and forced them to import high-value manufactured goods such as firearms, while exporting low-value agricultural products such as tobacco.
British commercial policy aimed at achieving three objectives: First, it sought to continue economically relying on Britain for American colonies. Second, it aims to expand the UK's manufactured goods market and boost the size of British industry. Third, we focused the UK's economic interests by focusing on value-added production. This will allow the UK to benefit from the American market.
This strategy was a success. By the 1770s, one in five British people worked in manufacturing, mainly supported by colonial demand. Between 1700 and 1773, colonial demand accounted for 72% of British manufacturing growth. During that time, the goods manufactured grew from 4% to 27.4% of the UK's total exports. The British trade surplus of colonies also rose sharply, rising from 67,000 pounds between 1721 and 1730 to 739,000 pounds between 1761 and 1770.
Naturally, Colony saw the opposite result. Trade with the UK served as a parasitic relationship, impoverishing and upsetting the colony until it eventually rebelled.
Today, history repeats itself. The US has fallen into a commercial trap once again. This time it's the same as China.
Data tells the story. The first two visualizations below compare imports from China in 2001 and 2021. Over these 20 years, the proportion of technologically advanced goods imported from China has increased significantly. For example, computers accounted for just 6.02% of China's imports in 2001. By 2021, that number had risen to 10.8%. At the same time, imports of low-value goods such as footwear and toys fell as a total share.
The following two visualizations show the total contrast of the US export profile to China.
In 2001, the US exported a wide range of high-value, technically advanced products. Half of total exports to China consisted of cutting-edge industries and advanced manufacturing and technology that supported American employment with millions of salaries.
By 2021, the photos had changed dramatically. Currently, most of America's exports are made up of raw materials such as soybeans, corn and petroleum, rather than high-tech products such as computers and aircraft. With this change, the US export profile resembles the profile of developing countries rather than the major global economic forces.
That may seem obvious, but I'll repeat. Instead of building it, America is buying the future. In the process, the state is sacrificing industrial strength and political independence to the ideals of economic globalism.
President Trump's proposed tariffs provide a final opportunity to reverse decline, Recover the American Dream. Without them, the US may have to support the rise of China and the collapse of the West.
