… is from page 78 of Art Carden’s and GMU Econ alum Caleb Fuller’s excellent new book, Mere Economics (footnote deleted, link added):
If protectionist logic is sound, [Henry] George reasoned that humans have been prosecuting wars most stupidly for millennia. After all, protectionist believe that by restricting the flow of imports into their country, they can jumpstart their country’s prosperity. Yet, naval blockades are common in war. If protectionists were right that cutting of trade with foreigners makes a nation great, why should blockades ever be used as weapons? Why not mail the adversary free supplies and weaponry while we’re at it? As George put it, “What protection teaches us, is to do to ourselves in time of peace what enemies seek to do to us in time of war.”
DBx: Yes.
Keep Henry George’s insight in mind when you next hear (as you will) apologists for Trump’s tariffs ask – mistakenly thinking they’ve caught free-traders in a “gotcha!” – “If tariffs are so destructive to the countries that impose them, why do so many governments use them on themselves?” Respond by asking your own question: “If blockades are so destructive to the countries on which they’re imposed, why do so many governments use them on their enemies?”
Governments are champs at doing all manner of stupid things, with protectionism being a fine example. But when engaged in actual shooting wars, government officials can less afford to play politics and act irrationally than they can in times of peace. If the goal is to impoverish a foreign nation, enforce a blockade against it – as many governments throughout history in wartime have done against their enemies.
To be clear, imposing protective tariffs is a perfectly rational action by politicians in pursuit of electoral success. The reason is that the benefits of these tariffs are narrowly concentrated on a relatively small number of beneficiaries – who will reliably express their gratitude during election season to the politicians – while the costs of the tariffs, although larger than the benefits – are spread out over a great number of victims. Each victim feels the costs less than each beneficiary feels the benefits. This political bias combines with widespread economic ignorance of the effects of trade and tariffs to make protectionism politically appealing.
