“Buy American”—or Bye-Bye America
"British jobs for British workers!" thundered Gordon Brown, as he emerged from the shadow of Tony Blair to become prime minister.
His populist sloganeering has now come back to bite him.
Across Britain, thousands laid down tools in wildcat strikes in solidarity with a walkout from a French-owned oil refinery in North Killinghome—to protest a $300 million contract to an Italian company that plans to bring in 400 Italian and Portuguese workers to fulfill it.
As Brown pleaded from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that Britain must not retreat into "protectionism," strikes spread to Scotland, Wales and Ulster.
Britain's commitment to let foreigners buy up its utilities and industries and bring in foreign workers to run them has backfired. Brown's own Labor Party is now angrily demanding that he live up to his pledge: British jobs for British workers.
"The Return of Economic Nationalism," wails the alarmed cover of The Economist. And understandably so.
For the stimulus bills of both Houses have a "Buy American" provision mandating that in "public works" only U.S. iron, steel and manufactures be used. The provision came out of the appropriations committee of the House on a 55-to-0 vote.
The Senate watered it down by declaring the Buy American provision must be consistent with all U.S. trade commitments. But Congress is sending a message: The rebuilding of America is to be a project of, by and for Americans, not outsourced. Sen. McCain's free-trade amendment, to strip all Buy American provisions from the bill, was routed 65 to 31.
The reaction of Barack Obama, a NAFTA skeptic in 2008 with bumper stickers that read, "Buy American, Vote Obama," was to genuflect to the gods of globalism and recant his economic patriotism.
"I think it would be a mistake ... at a time when worldwide trade is declining, for the United States to start sending a message that somehow we're just looking out after ourselves," he told Fox News. We don't want to "trigger a trade war," he told ABC.
Apparently, Obama was unnerved by rumbles from Europe, which is threatening to drag us before a World Trade Organization tribunal and have "Buy American" banished forever.
But there is no easy way out now for a Democratic Party where economic nationalism is rampant. If Congress drops or Obama refuses to enforce the Buy American provision, and billions of stimulus dollars are spent on foreign iron, steel and cement, Middle America will know whom to blame. But if Americans get the contracts, and Europeans get nothing, Europe will have to decide whether to retaliate and start a trade war with a populist and nationalist America.
We may be at a turning point in history. For we are about to choose whether to fully and finally cast our lot with globalism, or to become again a nation and people who put Americans first.
We are about to decide, perhaps for all time, whether we believe in a deepening interdependence leading to one world government, or we restore the independence won for us by the men on Mount Rushmore: Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt.
All four were economic nationalists. All would today be decried as protectionists. For all believed that the nation's independence and prosperity hung upon its ability to stand alone in the world, and that foreign goods should never enjoy as privileged access to America's markets as American goods made in the U.S.A.
All four put America first. And it was they who created out of 13 rural colonies the greatest manufacturing power in history. Is not their record superior to what Bush-Clinton-Bush left us: a hollowed-out industrial nation dependent on foreigners for the needs of our national life and for the loans to pay for them?
Even John Maynard Keynes came around in 1933 to believe in "national self-sufficiency."
Those who prattle about the perils of protectionism need to be asked: What has free trade produced, but a bankrupt America that must go hat-in-hand to Beijing to borrow the money to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure? Are we also to use Chinese iron, steel and cement because they, with their Third World wages, will work for less than our fellow Americans?
As for Europe's threat of a trade war, bring it on!
We would eat their lunch. As analyst Charles McMillion writes, in eight years of Bush, Canada ran up $500 billion in trade surpluses at our expense, Japan ran up $600 billion, the European Union $800 billion.
These three trading partners, often by imposing value-added taxes on U.S. imports, and rebating those taxes on goods sold here, racked up $1.9 trillion in trade surpluses, sucking jobs, factories and technology out of the United States. These trade deficits, and the even larger ones with China, says Paul Volcker, are behind our present crisis.
America is bust. It is shameful to have to go to China and Japan to borrow the money to rebuild America. But to go to China and Japan and borrow billions, and not spend the money here, makes zero sense.
We have indulged in free trade for a quarter century. And look where it has gotten us.
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Entries(RSS)
I have not seen "free trade" in my lifetime, and I am nearly sixty years old.
"These trade deficits, and the even larger ones with China, says Paul Volcker, are behind our present crisis.
America is bust. It is shameful to have to go to China and Japan to borrow the money to rebuild America. But to go to China and Japan and borrow billions, and not spend the money here, makes zero sense.
We have indulged in free trade for a quarter century. And look where it has gotten us."
8years of Reagan + 4 years of Bush + 8 years of BushII = 20 years
8 years of Clinton = 8 years
20 + 8 = 28 years
Quarter century = 25
Huummnn!!! Now I wonder which party will do the right thing and give "credit", when the "credit is due"?
Another excellent article by Mr. Buchanan. Free trade is a globalist ideology that will be the demise of First World nations.
An excellent column. Matt Roberts' comment is on target as well. The globalist ideology of free trade has been destructive of American economic independence and, if unchecked, will ultimately be destructive of American political independence as well.
It seems that there is a difference between free trade--the peaceful process of buying and selling goods between nations--and the system we have now--where foreign and multinational corporations own and control the "means of production" and manipulate the political system for their own ends. I assume the latter is what Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Piatak object too. Nations, states, and even primitive tribes have always exchanged goods with other nations, states, and tribes. Surely that form of free trade in itself is not an evil thing.
Karl Marx, George Will, Barack Obama, Paul Gigot, Bill Kristol, David Brooks and the Wall Street Journal, among others, are all for free trade. That would seem to make free trade an ideology at odds with conservatism, properly understood. It could be that localists as disparate as Wendell Berry, James Howard Kunstler and Bill Kauffman are more conservative than the scribes of official conservatism.
Self-sufficiency is absolutely the key to any measurable recovery (or hopes of recovery).
I was a child many decades ago when I was taught how Egypt relied on its vast cotton crops before the opening of the Suez canal. The British played no small role in pumping false hope into their economy, since the British Isles were prime buyer of cotton from India - therein Egypt saw a good source of income. OOooooooooops, mistake. After the Suez canal was opened the Egyptian government was apparently feeding their cotton to the locomotives of the coal burning trains. That's how I remember the lesson on MONOCULTURE - when a country does not protect itself, relies on false promises, poor predictions, unstable buyers, single product only. Some serious measures of protectionist nature have to be employed sooner rather than later.
Pardon my poor English. I should have said: I assume Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Piatak object to the latter.
Also, I agree with Mr. Leaberry that the localists are in fact the true conservatives of our day. Unlike the others you mention, Berry and Kauffman are trying to conserve something.
I wear blue jeans every day, so I decided that if WalMart won't sell American Made, then I'll order On Line. I found 2 manufacturers, Diamond Gusset and Pointer. Not the most hip, but they are reasonably priced, well-made and delivered quickly. I also found a western shirt Made in USA, and bought it as if it would soon be a collector's item. $100 here and there adds up to giving out workers dignity.
*our* workers
@4 Tom
Maybe that's what the satanic forces wanted all along. No polluting farms and factories, just sanitized cubicles to drive our population insane.
Mr Gervaise, there is also a brand called Texas jeans which are made in USA.
Where in the world did you find a western shirt made in America? I've been looking for one for three or four years.
Now, if I could just find American made cowboy boots!
@12 Allen
I got the shirt at a store in Bealeton VA which is going out of business. More and more of them are closing their doors. I have a pair of Eldorado boots that were quite expensive 20 years ago, but with regular repairs they're still good. Maybe they were too well-made.
And I'll be sure to check out Texas jeans.
I agree free trade for the U.S. has largely turned into an opportunity for manufacturers to offshore production to low wage countries with few of the labor and environmental rules that hamstring American producers.
But an almost as significant issue is the lack of U.S. production of the raw materials for manufacturing. Raw materials like natural gas, oil, electricity, lumber, and minerals account for over 80 per cent of Canada's trade balance with the U.S., meaning they actually support U.S. manufacturing. While Mexico exports significant consumer products to the U.S., energy is also a major component of its trade advantage. In all, in 2008, petroleum accounted for around 39 per cent of the trade deficit, while manufactured goods accounted for around 44 per cent, which came mostly from China and other Third World sources.
The trade deficit isn't so much about NAFTA, (which is supplying raw materials the U.S. is unable or unwilling to produce itself) as it is about multinational companies taking advantage of Third World labour.
Global trade=Global sweatshop
@14 Mr Stonehouse
.. free trade for the U.S. has largely turned into an opportunity for manufacturers to offshore production to low wage countries with few of the labor and environmental rules that hamstring American producers ...
Quite, but those hamstringing labor and environmental laws were penned by politicians elected by the people who worked in factories. They voted on a cleverly pitched notion which promised heaven on Earth, delivered a short-lived prosperity, and never mentioned the eventual economic collapse; which the elitist parasites probably wanted all along. The bureaucratic nibbling to death never ends. OSHA men visit jobsites and issue tickets to workers with their helmets on backwards.
The money-folk and other assorted capitalists can shift their money anywhere on the globe while being loyal only to a "proposition," and not a land per se. And if they can fleece the US taxpayer on thier way out the door, they'll try it. It's beyond time for angry mobs to seek retribution.
@12 Allen Wilson
You can find made in the USA cowboy boots.
Check out http://www.lucchese.com
All their boots are made completely in El Paso, TX and they are fantastic quality. The only drawback is that they are extremely expensive, but they will last you a lifetime, and get better with age.
On another note, I find the "buy American" concept very interesting. It is kind of like letting the crappy kid on your team so you won't hurt his feelings. If you keep doing this, the kid eventually thinks that he doesn't suck and that he doesn't actually need some serious practice before anyone takes him seriously. Sadly, this is what has become of the bulk of US manufacturing, and people like Pat Buchanan want to reinforce the bad behavior. If your product sucks, it sucks, and no amount of protectionism with "save" it. I will buy Lucchese boots because they are the best on the market, not just because they are made in Texas (although this is a nice thing). But I will also gladly buy Italian made dress shoes because they are better than "American" shoes that are actually made in China. The makers of these products take pride in what they make and it shows in the product.
This is another thing I find interesting about this site. Places like California are often ridiculed, yet, having lived there for some time now, I see more people buying local produce at farmers markets from farms in their surrounding areas than I do in middle America. Most people there buy their groceries at WalMart, never looking at a label to see that they are in many cases eating food from China of all places. These people call themselves conservative, too. There is also much more support for local businesses in California than I see anywhere else in the country.
Also, so many people posting here complain of excessive regulation on US industry. Well, take a look at Europe. Germany has more regulations than America when it comes manufacturing, but they still make better cars than the US auto manufacturers. They actually take pride in making BMWs and Audis and don't cut corners ever chance they get like our manufacturers who only look out for their own pocket book. It shows in the final product.
Greed is the problem in the US corporate environment, and no legislation will change this. It is not until people wake up and look past the end of their own noses that they might realize that they actually live in a community, not a bubble, and their actions affect everyone around them. The tree-hugging hippies in California (as annoying as they can be at times) understand this and act accordingly and put their money where their mouth is. People like Pat Buchanan still have a difficult time grasping this concept.
Chippewa Boots as well.
Germany has more regulations than America when it comes manufacturing, but they still make better cars than the US auto manufacturers.
@18 Daniel
I disagree. I bought a Ford Ranger in 1999. I drive about 1000 miles a week. The vehicle now has 430,000 miles on it. I replaced the clutch twice, the oil 100 times, the tires 5 times, the shocks, the brakes. In other words the things that wear out. I'm still using the original 3 liter engine. In what way could BMW or Mercedes beat that kind of reliability?
There is no such thing as made in America with respect to the Big 3 anymore.I have worked in auto related warehousing for the last 10 years, delivering warranty parts to Ford and Lincoln Mercury dealerships for 2 different companies, and I can tell you most engines, as well as other key components that make up Ford vehicles are not made in the USA. Even if they are assembled here, most of the car parts are foreign made.
I have always loved Pat, but to be honest his stuff is getting old, ranting about the same crap. Globalization is here to stay as to me it is the perfect way to spread the contagion that would bring down capitalism and have the masses clamoring for a new economic order that the elites have prepared for us. And to think that it was these same elites that came up with the contagion in the first place. Conservatives are constant losers for the simple fact that they are essentially fighting a losing battle against the tide of progress/time or in some cases the exact opposite throughout history. Whether you look at history through the linear Western type mindset, or the Eastern cyclical theory of how history travels, human history is always moving for the better or for worse.
To add to the above, I would like to say that with the continous flux that human history is always in that once a big monumental shift has ocurred and has gained momentum such as globalization has, it is virtually impossible to stop. In fact it is, but with the probable economic collpase of not only American, but the world, it will eventually reverse course as it might no longer be cost effective to produce overseas in the not too distant future, then America will be able to regain a big part of its manufacturing back. One could only hope, but I am not holding my breath.
As usual, Pat Buchanan is right. Globalism is nothing more that license for multinational corporations to use low wage nations to drive down the standard of living of wealthy nations and enrich their own pockets. Economic nationalism is the only way to go. Of course, at the same time, we need to move to a less regulated, freer market at home. Conservatives know that socialism only makes a nation poorer whereas freedom creates prosperity. The only way our nation can survive is by addressing this crisis as a nation.
How foolish.Why not strike in solidarity with the tens of thousands of victims of rape and murder,perpetrated by Jamaicans,Nigerians,and Pakistanis?Present for some time in their millions,and,it would appear,permanently.
The phrase "Economic Nationalism" was used in a booklet titled Tomorrow We Live published in 1938.Its author,Sir Oswald Mosley,was the leader of the British Union of Fascists.BUF followers went around squadristi style in black shirts,and made use of the Roman salute.
After the war,Mosley supported the idea of European integration.His slogan,"Britain first in Europe a nation",epitomizes his approach to political matters.
Global free-trade and economic nationalism are two sides of the same coin.And as with any slug,you're better off rejecting it,no matter which side is facing up.
Some form of extra-European integration is called for.Such a policy would better serve America's interests.Too bad our Anglo-maniacs,including third and fourth-rate "Catholics" like Buchanan and Sobran,are too dumb to realize it.
@25 Mr Jacobs
Socialism and globalism are more likely to manifest themselves under the more unpopular moniker "fascism." Businesses will not be nationalized like the British Rail, coal mines, and British Leyland automotive were in the 1960s, but medium-sized firms will be burdened with so many regulations regarding insurance, healthcare, safety, minimum wage, etc. that the term free-market will no longer apply. In other words it is more likely that the US will tread in the footsteps of Il Duce rather Karl Marx.
The trick is we need action not words anymore, and that was the point of my rants. At this point Buchanan is just either preaching to the choir or just to deaf ears about globalization. Thing is in reality it is much too late to do anything about reversing globalization. It is much easier to "destroy" than to rebuild. If we were able to effectively reverse globalization, it will be a multigenerational task. That is if we could dislodge the current crop of global elites, which is virtually impossible.
Robert Bruce,
Buchanan is hardly wasting his time. The one time the American people tend to reconsider their political views is when economic times are tough. They know that the policies of the recent past have not worked, and they may be willing to try something new. Thus, Buchanan's reminding them of what globalism has wrought, and what the historical American trade policy achieved, is quite useful.
Mr. Piatak has a very good point. The regime is not only in disarray, it is in disrepute. The failure of the Obama stimulus on top of the failures of George Bush and his Republicans may accelerate the loss of confidence Americans have in the natural political order. We may be entering into revolutionary times. Sometimes the last to realize the coming deluge are those who are insulated because they are at the top of the regime. For instance, I am sure that Czar Nicholas in June, 1914 would have been flabbergasted at how steep his personal decline would be within five years.
In that event America loses.Europe has a bigger market than us.It is also financially sound,comparatively speaking.They can also push us out of most other markets around the world.And when oil is denominated in euros,the dollar's run as heavy-weight champion will be at an end.A "populist and nationalist" America no longer makes sense;the nations populace isnt what it used to be.PB is out of step,out of touch,and out of tune.Lets hope he becomes out of luck sometime soon.
Jefferson and Lincoln?Hmmm.
The duality between globalism and nationalism is false.Europeanism is the only proper course for us now.
The French navy won "us our independence",preceded by the British army.Neither of whose services we had the decency to pay for.Freedom is indeed free-for some.
Pat is becoming more of a vulgarian by the day.I'm waiting for him to come out in favor of affirmative action;maybe he could even put in a good word or two for the ERA,and Communion in the hand.
Your point about the populace is accurate. I often wonder what Chesterton -- who loved democracy and the common man -- would be like were he alive today. I doubt he'd be a champion of either of those things now. The penny dreadfuls were manuals of virtue and saintly living compared to today's popular fiction. That is just one example of many. No, the populace is not what it once was.