Globalism was highly successful, lifting millions from poverty. Its failure wasn't the concept itself, but the lack of strategic boundaries. By allowing critical supply chains (like microchips and steel) to move offshore for cost savings, nations sacrificed sovereignty and created vulnerabilities that are now causing a predictable backlash.
Related Insights
The decline in U.S. manufacturing isn't just about labor costs. A crucial, overlooked factor is the disparity in savings. While Americans consumed, nations like China saved and invested in capital goods like factories, making their labor more productive and thus more attractive for manufacturing investment.
If AGI is concentrated in a few US companies, other nations could lose their economic sovereignty. When American AGI can produce goods far cheaper than local human labor, economies like the UK's could collapse. They would become economically dependent "client states," reliant on American technology for almost all production, with wealth accruing to Silicon Valley.
From China's perspective, producing more than it needs and exporting at cutthroat prices is a strategic tool, not an economic problem. This form of industrial warfare is designed to weaken other nations' manufacturing bases, prioritizing geopolitical goals over profit.
Twenty years ago, globalization and open markets (geopolitical tailwinds) created new opportunities for businesses. Today, rising nationalism, trade barriers, and security concerns act as headwinds, creating obstacles and increasing the complexity of international operations.
German automaker Volkswagen can now develop and build an electric vehicle in China for half the cost of doing so elsewhere. This shift from simple manufacturing to localized R&D—the "innovate in China for the world" model—signifies a dangerous hollowing out of core industrial capabilities and high-value jobs in Western economies.
The US won World War II largely due to its unparalleled manufacturing capacity. Today, that strategic advantage has been ceded to China. In a potential conflict, the US would face an adversary that mirrors its own historical strength, creating a critical national security vulnerability.
When trade policies force allies like Canada to find new partners, it's not a temporary shift. They build new infrastructure and relationships that won't be abandoned even if the political climate changes. The trust is broken, making the economic damage long-lasting and difficult to repair.
Geopolitical shifts mean a company's country of origin heavily influences its market access and tariff burdens. This "corporate nationality" creates an uneven playing field, where a business's location can instantly become a massive advantage or liability compared to competitors.
By shipping millions of jobs overseas, globalism forced American workers to compete with a much larger, cheaper international labor pool. This eliminated employers' need to compete for a finite domestic workforce, leading to wage stagnation. The proposed solution is to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.
Beyond raw materials, China's national ambition is to achieve near-total self-sufficiency. The prevailing mood is that there is "nothing for which it wants to rely on foreigners a single day longer than it has to." This philosophy of aggressive import substitution signals a fundamental break with the logic of reciprocal global trade.