I disagree with this remark of George Friedman’s in his recent criticism the post-recession recovery:
Across European and American society, economic classes that were traditionally linked to left or center parties have shifted their allegiance. One major reason has been that the parties they have traditionally supported were advocates of free trade.
IMO there are practically no advocates of free trade, either here in the United States or anywhere else and certainly none in positions of power. What there are are people who say they support free trade but actually are just pushing their national or personal benefit under the pretext of free trade.
When the United States blocks a major trade agreement on the grounds that the agreement doesn’t do enough to protect American intellectual property rights, that’s not free trade. That’s pursuit of national interest. Or political donor interest. That’s trying to dictate the terms of managed trade.
That’s what I think that practically all countries do. They look our for their national interests or for the interests of some of their citizens.
What has actually happened since the Great Recession is that, partially because the global trade picture has changed, partially because domestic political landscapes have changed, the various countries that have pushed for these managed trade agreements see their interests differently than they did.
