Gantry 5

 

Do Trump's measures put an end to free trade and capitalist globalization?

Bulletin N°56 avril 2025  It should first be recalled that the concept of free trade is consubstantial with the development of capitalism on a global scale. This theory was put forward at the end of the 18th century by Adam Smith 1 who developed the theory of absolute advantage 2 and by David Ricardo 3 at the beginning of the 19th century .  According to these authors, trade must develop without obstacles between countries in order to promote their mutual growth. This implies removing customs barriers likely to restrict the importation of goods and services. Free trade is therefore antithetical to protectionism. This system is based on the classical economic theory of the division of labor between nations, which, according to them, allows for the maximization of wealth creation, the development of trade and the profitability of capital. The debate on free trade was particularly vigorous in England regarding the Corn Law 4 . This debate pitted supporters of protectionism against free trade, ultimately seeing the victory of the latter.
In this regard, Karl Marx, in a speech 5 delivered before the Democratic Association of Brussels on 7 January 1848, observed: " To sum up: in the present state of society, what is free trade? It is the freedom of capital. When you have removed the few national fetters which still bind the march of capital, you will only have completely freed its action. (…) Gentlemen, do not allow yourselves to be intimidated by the abstract word freedom. Freedom of whom? It is not the freedom of a simple individual, in the presence of another individual. It is the freedom of capital to crush the worker. (…)
Do not believe that by criticizing free trade we intend to defend the protectionist system. We call ourselves enemies of the constitutional regime, but we do not call ourselves friends of the Ancien Régime.
But in general, nowadays, the protective system is conservative, while the system of free trade is destructive. It dissolves the old nationalities and pushes to the extreme the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In a word, the system of free trade hastens the social revolution. It is only in this revolutionary sense, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.  " Later, VI Lenin will develop in his work: " Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism " 6 the laws of development of capitalism on a world scale 7 .
Since the beginning of the 20th century  and after two imperialist world wars, the domination of transnational monopolies, the fusion of financial and industrial capital, capitalist globalization with the processes of relocation of production, internationalization of trade and financial capital - all the features that Lenin had identified - have developed and deepened.
Our party analyzed these transformations during its national office on February 13, 2016 8 . If works in France are relatively rare on imperialism, we will nevertheless note two sources of stimulating analyses, the translation by Éditions Critiques of John Smith's book: Imperialism in the 21st Century 9 and the work of Samir Amin on: The Law of Globalized Value 10 .
In the preparatory text for our party's national initiative on imperialism of March 23, 2024 11 , we noted that: " The clashes within imperialism are becoming more acute in the logic of seeking markets and the highest rates of profit and accumulation for capital, their object is the conquest of sources of raw materials, the control of material and immaterial communication routes and of the labor force. " These trends are only becoming more pronounced, especially as the hegemony of the United States as the dominant power within imperialism is challenged by the rise of capitalism in Asia 12 , and the conditions for the realization of profits and capitalist accumulation require a greater intensity of the exploitation of human labor 13 , against a backdrop of deindustrialization, desired or undergone by the main Western capitalist powers including the United States. This situation generates increasingly violent conflicts within the imperialist system, ranging from high-intensity wars between capitalist powers, such as in Ukraine, or low- and medium-intensity wars by proxy , wars that are responsible for millions of victims, to trade wars, cyberattacks, political destabilization, interference... colonial war in Palestine...
In the United States, the response to these trends to reverse their course does not date from the election of D. Trump. Thus, as early as 2011, President Obama declared that the shift towards Asia would henceforth be the major axis of American foreign policy 14 . More recently, J. Biden with the Inflation Reduction Act 15 (Inflation Reduction Act) has massively injected public credits to aid American companies to give them a competitive advantage over European and Asian competitors while promoting foreign investment in the United States. If the results of this policy have been mixed, even causing social discontent that got the better of the Democratic candidate in the presidential election, there is no doubt that its function was to act in counter to the trend of the relative industrial decline of the United States. From this point of view, the choice of US capitalists to actively support some of them or to align themselves with Trump for others has no other meaning than that of vigorously accentuating a protectionist policy capable of giving room for maneuver to the manufacturing industry for more profits and more attractiveness for foreign investments. Likewise, this will be the case at the price of a cure of general austerity for employees and massive layoffs in the state apparatus. It is therefore indeed a choice and not a whim as the entire media apparatus tries to make us believe. No, Trump and his team are not crazy, they are trying to provide a response to the weakening of US capitalism by waging a war against all other capitalist states, friend or enemy 16 . Obviously, this war will cause victims. First in the United States, where entire sections of the wage-earning population will be sacrificed on the altar of rising prices, unemployment, and the decline in social protection, thus a reduction in the price of their labor, but also throughout the world, where the slowdown in trade will contribute to the slowdown in economic activity. In these conditions, the tendencies towards greater aggressiveness of capitalism will be reinforced at the level of each nation with increasingly austerity policies, but also with the militarization of the economy, already in motion with its corollary, that of even more violent confrontations within the imperialist system.
The search for and implementation of policies that act as counter-tendencies to the crisis of capital accumulation will therefore also increase class clashes. This is where the cardinal question of the organization and action of the revolutionary party arises, a question we recently posed: advancing in the gathering of communists for revolutionary changes 17 which is therefore more relevant than ever.
6 VI Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Les Éditions du Progrès, USSR, 1967
9 John Smith, Imperialism in the 21st Century: Globalization, Subexploitation and the Final Crisis of Capitalism, Éditions Critiques, 2019
10 Samir Amin, The Law of Globalized Value, Le Temps des Cerises, Éditions Delga, 2013
 
“Anti-wokeism” and international trade:
small skirmish in the overall confrontation
The Trump administration is mobilizing against "wokeism," in its view, a form of moral dictatorship instituted against the white male and inherently anti-American through its rewriting of history that denigrates conservative values. Upon taking office, President Trump signed Executive Order 14173, an "anti-woke" law that aims, in particular, to prohibit all affirmative action.
The American authorities intend to enforce this decision, including by foreign companies operating on US soil. Thus, the American embassies in France and Spain have sent a letter accompanied by a "certification form" to companies asking them to comply with American law. They must therefore certify that they do not apply a so-called diversity policy in their personnel management, and failing to do so, they will be excluded from all federal public procurement (around €600 billion, mainly arms spending).
According to initial reports, TotalEnergies, BNP Paribas and L'Oréal are among the recipients of this letter.
When questioned, former Medef president Roux De Bézieux expressed his concern about this American injunction but pointed out that customs duties were far more harmful. In fact, the outcry from the French authorities is undoubtedly disproportionate to the consequences of this request from the American authorities, which only concerns federal public procurement and not the vast United States market.
The Biden administration's decision to prioritize the federal government's purchase of "made in the US" products and services had not generated as much publicity. Indeed, trade wars are nothing new across the Atlantic.
In fact, with the new administration, it has taken on a completely different dimension, so much so that Japan, South Korea, and China have come together to define a common response to this American direction. A truly spectacular meeting given the differences between these three nations. Imperialist rivalries do not prevent temporary rapprochements when threats require it. Do we not hear calls for a rapprochement between China and the European Union, even from the facilitator of the very conformist Jacques Delors Institute?
In short, this demand to comply with the new US law has allowed those who are trying to limit workers' rights in our country to play the scaredy-cat, anxious to defend societal values? If the rights and respect of workers are raised in business disputes, they certainly remain an alibi whose fervor in evocation is inversely proportional to the depth of the concern.
In short, all these recantations in both Washington and Paris are of no interest to the world of work, whose unity must prevail over diversity with organizations, at least the most combative, which always have the fight against discrimination at heart.