[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

International News
See other International News Articles

Title: The Donald’s Trade Stance Is MORE Conservative Than Paul Ryan’s
Source: VDare
URL Source: http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-d ... e-conservative-than-paul-ryans
Published: May 20, 2016
Author: Pat Buchanan
Post Date: 2016-05-20 00:04:40 by nativist nationalist
Keywords: None
Views: 599
Comments: 5

In his coquettish refusal to accept the Donald, Paul Ryan says he cannot betray the conservative “principles” of the party of Abraham Lincoln, high among which is a devotion to free trade.

But when did free trade become dogma in the Party of Lincoln?

As early as 1832, young Abe declared, “My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank … and a high protective tariff. These are my sentiments and political principles.”

Campaigning in 1844, Lincoln declared, “Give us a protective tariff and we will have the greatest nation on earth.”

Abe’s openness to a protective tariff in 1860 enabled him to carry Pennsylvania and the nation. As I wrote in The Great Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to the Gods of the Global Economy in 1998:

“The Great Emancipator was the Great Protectionist.”

During his presidency, Congress passed and Abe signed 10 tariff bills. Lincoln inaugurated the Republican Party tradition of economic nationalism.

Vermont’s Justin Morrill, who shepherded GOP tariff bills through Congress from 1860 to 1898, declared, “I am for ruling America, for the benefit, first, of Americans, and for the ‘rest of mankind’ afterwards.”

In 1890, Republicans enacted the McKinley Tariff that bore the name of that chairman of ways and means and future president.

“Open competition between high-paid American labor and poorly paid European labor,” warned Cong. William McKinley, “will either drive out of existence American industry or lower American wages.”

Too few Republicans of McKinley’s mindset sat in Congress when NAFTA and MFN for China were being enacted.

In the 1895 “History of the Republican Party,” the authors declare, “the Republican Party … is the party of protection … that carries the banner of protection proudly.”

Under protectionist policies from 1865 to 1900, U.S. debt was cut by two- thirds. Customs duties provided 58 percent of revenue. Save for President Cleveland’s 2 percent tax, which was declared unconstitutional, there was no income tax. Commodity prices fell 58 percent. Real wages, despite a doubling of the population, rose 53 percent. Growth in GDP averaged over 4 percent a year. Industrial production rose almost 5 percent a year.

The U.S. began the era with half of Britain’s production, and ended it with twice Britain’s production.

In McKinley’s first term, the economy grew 7 percent a year. After his assassination, Vice President Theodore Roosevelt took over. His reaction to Ryan’s free-trade ideology? In a word, disgust.

“Pernicious indulgence in the doctrine of free trade seems inevitably to produce fatty degeneration of the moral fibre,” wrote the Rough Rider, “I thank God I am not a free trader.”

When the GOP returned to power after President Wilson, they enacted the Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922. For the next five years, the economy grew 7 percent a year.

While the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, signed eight months after the Crash of ’29, was blamed for the Depression, Nobel laureate Milton Friedman ferreted out the real perp, the Federal Reserve.

Every Republican platform from 1884 to 1944 professed the party’s faith in protection. Free trade was introduced by the party of Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

Our modern free-trade era began with the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Among the eight no votes in the Senate were Barry Goldwater and Prescott Bush.

Even in recent crises, Republican presidents have gone back to the economic nationalism of their Grand Old Party. With the Brits coming for our gold and Japanese imports piling up, President Nixon in 1971 closed the gold window and imposed a 10 percent tariff on Japanese goods.

Ronald Reagan slapped a 50 percent tariff on Japanese motorcycles being dumped here to kill Harley-Davidson, then put quotas on Japanese auto imports, and on steel and machine tools.

Reagan was a conservative of the heart. Though a free trader, he always put America first.

What, then, does history teach?

The economic nationalism and protectionism of Hamilton, Madison, Jackson, and Henry Clay, and the Party of Lincoln, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, and Coolidge, of all four presidents on Mount Rushmore, made America the greatest and most self-sufficient republic in history.

And the free-trade, one-worldism of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama enabled Communist China to shoulder us aside us and become the world’s No. 1 manufacturing power.

Like Britain, after free-trade was adopted in the mid-19th century, when scribblers like David Ricardo, James Mill and John Stuart Mill, and evangelists like Richard Cobden dazzled political elites with their visions of the future, America has been in a long steady decline.

If we look more and more like the British Empire in its twilight years, it is because we were converted to the same free-trade faith that was dismissed as utopian folly by the men who made America.

Where in the history of great nations—Britain before 1850, the USA, Bismarck’s Germany, postwar Japan and China today—has nationalism not been the determinant factor in economic policy?

Speaker Ryan should read more history and less Ayn Rand.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

Listening to Mark Levin the other night. He talked about how great free trade is, and that tariffs would be like taking the mark of the beast. Definitely ignorant of history.

Wonder who is paying him to put out that drivel?

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.

There are no Carthaginian terrorists.

President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. --Clint Eastwood

"I am concerned for the security of our great nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within." -- General Douglas MacArthur

Stoner  posted on  2016-05-20   9:39:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

Ryan is a free trader. Trump is not.

Here is a statement made by a man who had been a free-trader in his earlier years, but whose observation of what actually happened in the world around him caused him to change his view:

Otto von Bismarck, Chancellor of the German Empire, said the following in a speech to the Reichstag in 1879:

“I do not mean to discuss protection and free trade in the abstract... We have opened wide the doors of our State to the imports of foreign countries, and we have become the dumping-ground for the over-production of all those countries. Germany being swamped by the surplus production of foreign nations, prices have been depressed and the development of all our industries and our entire economic position have suffered in consequence.

"If the danger of protection were as great as we are told by our enthusiastic free traders, France would have been impoverished long ago, for she has had protection since the time of Colbert and she should have been ruined long ago, owing to the theories which have guided her economic theory.

"According to my opinion, we are slowly bleeding to death owing to insufficient protection… We demand a moderate protection for German labor. Let us close our doors and erect some barriers in order to reserve to German industries at least the home market, in which German good-nature is at present being exploited by the foreigner.

"I base my opinion on the practical experience of the time in which we are now living. I see that those countries which possess protection are prospering and that those which possess free trade are decaying. Mighty England, that powerful athlete, stepped out into the open market after she had strengthened her sinews, and said, ‘Who will fight me? I am prepared to meet everybody.’ But England herself is slowly returning to protection, and in some years she will take it up in order to save for herself at least the home market…”

At the time Bismarck said that, France's and Germany's economies were both approximately the same size, and the economy of Great Britain was 40% larger. Germany adopted protectionism, while Britain stayed primarily focused on free trade. By 1913, the German economy was larger than the British. Indeed, it was that economic superiority of Germany that drove the British to break their historical isolation and forced them into permanent alliance with France. Head to head, just the Germans versus the British alone, the Germans were pulling further and further ahead of the British. The German industry was larger. It was only a matter of time before the Germans built themselves naval superiority over the British. The war came before that happened.

And to be clear, the Americans became the world's greatest economic power, a fifth larger in economic might than the entire British Empire combined, by 1913, during the same time period. And we also did that behind the wall of a tariff.

I agree with Bismarck. He was correct in his assessment, he followed his judgment. The Americans had the same view. The result was that by 1913, the United States was the world's number one economy, and Germany was the world's number two. England, with free trade, fell to third place and had to ally with their historical enemy, France, in order to fend off Germany.

Free trade brought the British low while protectionism brought the Americans and Germans above them. But some British traders got very rich. We're repeating the same error.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-20   10:01:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Stoner (#1) (Edited)

Listening to Mark Levin the other night. He talked about how great free trade is, and that tariffs would be like taking the mark of the beast. Definitely ignorant of history.

Wonder who is paying him to put out that drivel?

He believes it. Levin has drunk the Kool-ade. He truly believes what he is saying, and he rants and raves and insults everybody who disagrees with him.

He and like-minded believers have walled themselves off into a fever swamp of bad economic and political ideas and ideals, which they cling to very fiercely, attacking all who disagree.

The problem for them is the same problem the free traders had resisting Bismarck. Bismarck looked at the world as it actually WAS, and saw that the theories of the free traders DO NOT WORK.

On paper, they're great, they make perfect economic sense. But economics are just models, very imperfect simulations of reality. Free traders became, and have become, so enamored of their models that they are unable to see when they are failing.

So Levin ends up sounding like Baghdad Bob, extolling the virtues of ideas and ideals that everybody SEES failing all around them, and failing for year after year after year.

This year we see that the Republican Party has reached the breaking point. The large plurality of Republican voters no longer believe in the free trade mantra. It does not work, they know it does not work, so they elected an overt protectionist as their leader. We tried free trade. It destroyed our economic base. We KNOW it, because we have LIVED it.

But you still have true believers like Levin screaming through the microphone that's we're just stupid and blind. Actually, our eyes are wide open. HE is a crank. He is a true believer in ideas and ideals that have proven to be failures TWICE in two centuries: The British Empire lost its supremacy to America and Germany because of free trade. And America is losing our own to China because of free trade. It's the same error.

He doesn't get it. The bulk of Republicans, and also Sanders voters on the Democrat side, DO get it.

Now Levin is screaming about Trump's list of judicial appointments. He says that the list is good, but that Trump won't actually fight for them.

Levin is the classic case of the guy who has so fallen in love with his ideals that he cannot compromise on anything, which means in the real world that he always loses on everything. Because in the real world NOBODY ever gets everything he wants. Men who refuse to compromise on anything end up with nothing, because no man has sufficient power and wealth to be able to get everything he wants and to be able to protect it against people who want to take it.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-20   10:32:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3)

Levin, like Beck, is totally obsessed with hatred for Trump. That is all they think of.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.

There are no Carthaginian terrorists.

President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. --Clint Eastwood

"I am concerned for the security of our great nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within." -- General Douglas MacArthur

Stoner  posted on  2016-05-20   10:38:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Stoner (#4)

Levin, like Beck, is totally obsessed with hatred for Trump. That is all they think of.

I turned off Levin for good when I tuned into his station and heard him ranting about Trump for the third day in a row.

Levin is a crank. He has all sorts of ideas and hatred, and lots of vitriol, and nothing he proposes will ever come to pass. He's not the head of any movement. He's just an angry nut with a mike.

Who needs that?

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-20   10:40:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com