It’s no secret that blue-collar workers across the country feel left behind. There’s a reason that recent elections, from Brexit to Donald Trump’s, reflect a growing fear of globalization. Trump won by putting these “forgotten” folks at the top of the agenda, by telling them he was putting “America First” and alleviating their fears. Despite forever blasting the policies of the president, it seems 2020 candidate Elizabeth Warren took notice of this gameplan, and is following in his footsteps with her own presidential campaign. If she keeps it up, she could find success the way Trump did.
But the Massachusetts senator is a protectionist, and more Trump-style protectionism isn’t a good thing.
The attack on globalization has turned it into a dirty word. But it used to be considered an economic phenomenon, one that boundlessly contributed to economic growth and innovation everywhere. Then politicians began offering knee-jerk solutions to economic grievances and blaming the supposed anti-American factors of globalization for their woes. In turn, frightened voters fell in line without recognizing the unintended consequences of their ideas.
It’s happening again. Warren has been surging in the polls recently, with an impressive $19.1 million second-quarter fundraising haul. She’s digging her heels into the Trumpist approach of attacks on certain groups in the name of economic progress. While Trump is forever going after immigrants for “taking American jobs,” Warren is vilifying multinational companies, painting them as perpetrators of an anti-America agenda.
Of course, Warren and Trump’s solutions serve to isolate our economy from the world. That’s not a good thing.
Trade agreements foster peace, facilitate relations between nations, and increase prosperity. The immigration Trump rails against actually stimulates economic growth by adding workers to the economy and increasing productivity which boosts GDP and helps average people. The multinational corporations Warren and Trump love to hate actually bring cheap goods to poor people across the globe.
Trump makes a habit of condemning other nations for taking advantage of us with poor trade deals. He blames them for the manufacturing crisis in America, especially in the rural Midwest. The president has blasted NAFTA, labeled NATO members “delinquent,” and endlessly attacked China for the loss of domestic manufacturing jobs. Warren points the finger at “greedy, anti-American” companies for moving offshore and causing detrimental damage to American communities.
During last week’s debates, she took a stand against unpatriotic corporations once more, broadly reiterating what she’d said in an earlier Medium post titled “A Plan for Economic Patriotism.” In the piece, she wrote:
Warren and Trump are right that there’s a serious issue for the average American worker that desperately needs both our attention and a solution. Rural towns and communities are suffering due to the decline in manufacturing employment, and the people of the Midwest shouldn’t feel hopeless merely because they don’t live in urban areas. But haphazardly advocating for a Band-Aid solution won’t actually fix the problem.
There are other ways to approach the issue that won’t mess with the economy in the way protectionism does. As a 2017 Ball State University study reported, 88% of job losses in manufacturing in recent years can be attributed to automation. In that case, instead of vilifying globalization, perhaps we should be equipping America’s blue-collar workers for a modern global economy, not causing them to shake in their boots at the idea of it.
Whether they’re blaming immigrants, bad trade deals, or the suited men in downtown Manhattan skyscrapers, Trump and Warren are tirelessly trying to ignite the illusion that they’ll defeat the oppressors of working-class Americans. But, in the end, it’s average people they’ll end up hurting the most.
Charlie Gers (@CharlieGers) is a contributor for Young Voices and current Development Apprentice at the Washington Policy Center in Seattle.
