Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Free trade with China is still good for us all
Free trade with China is still good for us all
Jan 14, 2026 11:56 PM

Despite pushback from both left and right, free markets should always be supported, because they free people to live out their potential—even in despotic regimes like China’s.

Read More…

Doug Irwin in his seminal book Free Trade Under Fire points out that Democrats and Republicans have historically vacillated on free trade. The Democratic Party of the late 19th century up until World War II was the party of trade liberalization when Republicans consistently voted for high tariffs. From the 1950s through the early ʼ90s, there was a bipartisan consensus favoring reduced tariffs.

Since NAFTA, a free trade agreement signed into law by President Bill Clinton, support for free trade among Democrats and Republicans has flip-flopped. Labor unions have generally opposed free trade agreements, which helps us understand the shift among Democrats. Republican president Donald Trump engaged in an all-out trade war with China and ran his presidency largely on an anti-free-trade agenda.

In modern conservative circles, free trade is continually mocked and rejected but not because of labor union objection. The conservative case against free trade stems from a mistake, shared by Democrats, that trade among nations is a zero-sum game. I was recently at a conference of conservatives in which two alarming statements were made: “You can either have free trade or free markets but not both,” and “Comparative advantage doesn’t work.”

As an economist, these are shocking statements, both because they ing from conservatives, whom I expect to understand economics, and because they are glaringly wrong. When giving a reasoned economic response, I am sometimes labeled a “globalist,” which I suppose, reading between the hyperbolic lines, means I must hate America.

Nothing could be further from the truth. You can love your country and unapologetically support free trade at all times and under all circumstances. Free trade is about opening markets, and markets are about people. Ensuring the freedom to sell your ideas, labor, skills, and talents is the best way to love your neighbor by serving them.

Free trade is the world’s most successful anti-poverty program. It opens markets and brings goods and services heretofore both unavailable and unthinkable. Free trade widens the circles of cooperation and allows us both to benefit from and make contributions to human flourishing; this is our Christian duty. Free trade removes the shackles of subsistence farming and the grind of daily survival, and allows the possibility of human innovation and creativity to be shared across the globe. Free trade moves us out of the zero-sum game of survival of the strongest and into the positive-sum game where all parties win, and where we are empowered with new choices and opportunities. These facts are not new; they hark back to the insights of Adam Smith, who in 1776 wrote:

What is prudence in the conduct of every family can scarce be folly in that of a great kingdom. If a foreign country can supply us with modity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry, employed in a way in which we have some advantage.

We are mercially integrated world, and that makes us all better. Free trade is the prudent course of action because it means that we each produce the things we are relatively better at doing. In this we actualize our parative advantages, and thus are freed from producing those things for which we would be higher-cost producers. This is the nature of stewardship, and it allows us to widen the circles of cooperation. If you are wearing a suit that you didn’t make, you are a living example parative advantage working.

Yet free trade and moving from more closed-trade relationships to more open-trade relationships bring great objections. British historian Thomas Babington Macaulay said, “Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular.” Most of the conservative objections I hear to free trade focus on our current geopolitical relationship with China. Let’s face it, China is no bastion of free markets. Rather, it is a country ruled by authoritarians who hate freedom. That’s not just a bad thing for us; it’s bad for the citizens of China, all of whom are made in God’s image and likeness and have creative potential but live under the yoke of economic and political authoritarianism.

This is no excuse to abandon free trade with China; we need free trade with China now more than ever. Since 1980, with limited internal reforms, China has raised 800 million people from abject poverty. China has moved from “unfree” in the Economic Freedom data to “mostly unfree.” Some progress is better than no progress, and the future remains undetermined.

There is great work to be done in China, and the world watches with bated breath as their government engages in genocide and tyranny. But here is where the economic way of thinking es necessary. China needs free trade now more than ever. Our trade policy should be directed at how to trade with entrepreneurs in China while not supporting their government and its state-owned enterprises. We can hold the Chinese government accountable for its cheating and espionage without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Creative regional trade policy can be part of the solution. But denying ordinary Chinese citizens a better life by denying them access to economic opportunity is never the answer.

Not too long ago, skeptics of free trade were worried that Japan was buying up the world and would have a larger economy than ours. What economics teaches us is that anytime a country makes internal changes in the direction of free markets, their economy will grow. That is a good thing, because as individuals in other countries grow richer, they have more money to spend on things we produce, and we have more entrepreneurs from which w, can benefit. I argue that this is what we want in China—more trade that allows Chinese citizens to grow richer. This is also the best deterrent to greater restrictions on freedom by the Chinese government.

Some worry that China’s economy will eclipse ours in size, to which economists respond, “I hope so.” China has a population that is 4.3 times as big as the United States. We should hope their economy is bigger. In a regime of free markets and political liberalism, this is an indicator of growing wealth and prosperity. Free trade frees people, and that is what China needs. Free trade will unleash human creativity. What we can and should do is support free trade with people wherever and whenever possible. It’s always time for free trade.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The Cash Cow
CRC has made two good articles available recently (these are Adobe .pdf linked documents) that dispell the myth that large corporations are conservative monoliths supporting anti-environment causes. The first is Funding Liberalism with Blue-Chip Profits; Fortune 100 Foundations Back Leftists Causes. The other is called The Price of Doing Business: Environmentalist Groups Toe Funders’ Lines. Both have page after page of data on the amounts that organizations like Earth Justice, Nature Conservancyਊnd Sierra Club are getting from big business and billion dollar...
Local Help on the Street
We’re working through the meaning of the tenth anniversary of welfare reform, debating important ‘next phase’ issues like marriage and fatherhood and what those mean to helping people leave poverty…permanently. That debate about government’s appropriate role in addressing social need is important. At least equally important is the work or private citizens at the local level, ‘on the street’–figuratively and literally. In February, a blog post featured A Way Out Victim Assistance program in Memphis, one of Acton’s Samaritan Award...
Sew Efficient
US News and World Report has a little feature on a pany that has expanded into more distant markets and thereby grown. The article identifies trade agreements and technology as paving the way for such expansion by many small, local businesses. Decreasing tariffs and regulation and improving technology—these are examples of what economists call “lowering transaction costs,” which improves efficiency and benefits producers and consumers alike. The US News article highlights an American business, but, even more crucially, opening international...
GM Bacteria and Malaria
“Scientists have discovered a way to help stop the spread of malaria by genetically altering a bacterium that infects about 80 percent of the world’s insects. Malaria is primarily transmitted through mosquito bites and kills more than a million people every year.” Source: “Genetically Altered Bacteria Could Block Malaria Transmission,” by Lisa Pickoff-White, The National Academies, Science in the Headlines, August 2, 2006. HT: Zondervan “To the Point” For more on the fight against malaria, visit Acton’s Impact campaign page....
Corporate America and the Campus
More news on the campus that may disturb those who are already hyperventilating about corporate involvement in higher education: university newspapers are receiving increasing corporate attention. In an article in today’s WSJ, Emily Steel writes, “Hip, local, relevant and generated by students themselves, college newspapers have held steady readership in recent years while newspapers in general have seen theirs shrink. Big advertisers are going on campus to reach these young readers. Ford Motor Co., Microsoft Corp., Samsung Electronics Co., and...
‘Beyond Petroleum’ or ‘Big Problem’? UPDATED
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams is asking, “Was the BP pipeline problem preventable?” It seems that BP has allegedly been giving required maintenance to the pipeline short shrift: “Allegations about BP’s maintenance practices have been so persistent that a criminal investigation now is under way into whether BP has for years deliberately shortchanged maintenance and falsified records to cover it up.” BP shut down the Prudhoe Bay oil field earlier this week, after a “spill” resulting from “unexpected corrosion.”...
Our Changing Environmental Perspective
Seth Godin, a marketing guru, passes along this nugget: One mistake marketers make is a little like the goldfish that never notices the water in his tank. Our environment is changing. Always. Incrementally. Too slowly to notice, sometimes. But it changes. What we care about and talk about and react to changes every day. Starbucks couldn’t have launched in 1970. We weren’t ready. Of course, sometimes the reason that our perspective on an issue changes is because the thing itself...
The Effects of Federal Unionism
According to figures recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, federal workers receive on average about double what private sector workers make: $106,579 vs. $53,289. These numbers are based on pensation. A study done by the Cato Institute (PDF here of 2004 figures), under the direction of Chris Edwards, shows that for 2005, “If you consider wages without benefits, the average federal civilian worker earned $71,114, 62 percent more than the average private-sector worker, who made $43,917.” In...
Scarcity and Innovation
“Throughout history, shortages of vital resources have driven innovation, and energy has often starred in these technological dramas. The desperate search for new sources of energy and new materials has frequently produced remarkable advances that no one could have imagined when the shortage first became evident.” So says Stephen L. Sass, a professor of materials science and engineering at Cornell, in today’s NYT op-ed, “Scarcity, Mother of Invention.” He concludes, “If there is anything to be learned from history, it’s...
Protestants and Natural Law: A Forgotten Legacy
In this mentary, “Protestants and Natural Law: A Forgotten Legacy,” I ask the question: “So, why don’t Protestants like Natural Law?” The short answer is: There isn’t a short answer. Tracing out the reasons that twentieth-century Protestants have given for why natural law is off limits plicated and can take a person in many different directions. In my judgment, the great tragedy in the Protestant rejection of natural law is not merely that Protestants (and particularly evangelicals) have had tremendous...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved