Pat Lynch reminds us of America’s strong anti-foreign-interventionist roots. Here’s his conclusion:
Non-interventionism did not quickly fade from view after Washington gave his farewell address. It was an important part of American foreign policy with respect to Europe and the Americas for the better part of 50 years after the Founding. The circumstances changed very dramatically in the middle and later parts of the 19th century as the United States invaded Mexico and pursued a colonial war against the remnants of the Spanish Empire. But this should not obscure the fact that non-interventionism helped guide the U.S. out of the ugly outcome of the War of 1812 and retains a strong philosophical and practical appeal to this day. Any politician discussing reviving such a tradition need not be a Russian agent—instead he or she may simply be a student of a more prudent period of American political history.
Tim Worstall reveals some of USMCA’s cronyism. A slice:
The only reasonable or fair trade deal is the one I’ve continually proposed for my native Britain as it leaves the European Union, here lightly adapted for U.S. usage:
-
There will be no tariff or nontariff barriers on imports into the U.S.
-
Imports will be regulated in exactly the same manner as domestic production.
-
You can do what you like.
-
That’s it.
As Eric Boehm reports, Bernie Sanders is as ignorant about – and as bad on – trade as is Trump.
Max Gulker writes brilliantly about the emergent-order properties of markets.
