Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Free trade with China is still good for us all
Free trade with China is still good for us all
May 2, 2026 6:35 AM

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
Geneva, the WCRC, and the Ecumenical-Industrial Complex
A delegate at last week’s Uniting General Council of the World Communion of Reformed Churches held at Calvin College urged the newly formed group to consider moving its headquarters out of the Ecumenical Centre in Geneva. Citing the costs associated with travel to and from the Swiss city, as well as those incurred during visits to the headquarters, Rev. Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, general secretary of the Reformed Church in America, asked the WCRC to move its offices to the global south....
Evangelicals and Global Warming
This week’s Acton Commentary. Benjamin B. Phillips is Assistant Professor of Systematic Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Houston Campus. This commentary was based on an article in the Journal of Markets & Morality (Vol. 12, No. 2). +++++++++ Evangelicals and Global Warming By Benjamin Phillips Since 2005, evangelicals have divided into two roughly opposing camps over the question of anthropogenic global warming. Official statements of the Southern Baptist Convention through its resolution process, its Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission,...
Rev. Sirico: Don’t devalue Christian heritage
In a new column in the Detroit News, Rev. Robert A. Sirico warns of a “cultural shift which would reject Christian revelation’s role in the forming of American and Western civilization.” +++++++++ June 29, 2010 Don’t devalue Christian heritage By Fr. Robert Sirico A week or so ago I struck up a friendly conversation with a cleaning lady upon entering a hotel. She right away asked me, “Did you hear the news of the statue of Christ being struck with...
On Cops and Cameras
Gizmodo has an intriguing post about attempts to regulate and even criminalize photography. As Wendy McIlroy reports, “In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer.” She goes on to detail some of the exceptions and caveats, noting, The legal justification for arresting the “shooter” rests on existing wiretapping or eavesdropping laws, with statutes against obstructing law enforcement sometimes cited. Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland are among the 12 states in which all parties must...
Confessing the Wrong Side
Last week’s Acton Commentary, “Unity or Unanimity at Reformed Council?” was picked up by a number of news outlets, including the Detroit News and the Holland Sentinel. The latter paper published a response to the piece by Jeffrey Japinga, “Intersection of economics and faith is valid subject for church council.” I think Japinga misreads me, and in doing so (perhaps unintentionally) ends up agreeing with me. He thinks that I oppose the Accra Confession because “what it says disagrees with...
Adam Smith versus John Maynard Keynes
In the most recent edition of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Acton’s Research Director Samuel Gregg has an article in which he argues that the ongoing financial and economic crisis has raised serious questions about the credibility and usefulness of much mainstream contemporary economics. Drawing partly on his recent book, Wilhelm Röpke’s Political Economy (2010), Gregg suggests that much mainstream economics after Keynes became gradually dominated by a fixation upon econometrics that has threatened at times to...
Acton University Lectures Available Online
We’ve posted a dozen or so AU 2010 lectures in our online store and expect to be putting up many more in the days ahead. They’re priced at $1.99 and transactions are through a secure server at the Acton Institute Digital Downloads page. Check back often. Here’s what available now: — Thoughts on Human Dignity – Rev. Robert A. Sirico – June 15, 2010 — Centralization and Civil Society – Dr. Daniel Mahoney – June 16, 2010 — The Federalist...
Government and the Good Life
In preparing for an Acton University lecture last week on Christianity and Government (you can listen to it here)[audio: I was reflecting on some of the core differences between a Christian vision of government parison to modern, secular visions. While there is no single Christian vision of government and good Christians can disagree on a host of topics, one of the things that sets apart the Christian vision is a robust vision of the good life and integrated human flourishing...
A Question of English Usage?
Christianity Today looks at the way the State Department has recently begun using the phrase “freedom of worship” instead of “freedom of religion.” The Obama Administration sees these phrases as more or less equivalent. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed the shift in language. In a December speech at Georgetown University, she used “freedom of worship” three times but “freedom of religion” not at all. While addressing senators in January, she referred to “freedom of worship” four times and “freedom...
Culture and Economic Decline
At MercatorNet, Sheila Liaugminas looks at the bank regulation push — enshrined in another 2,000 page document that few of the legislators behind this effort will actually read. In “Social Order on the Surface” she recalls an Acton conference where she heard this from Rev. Robert A. Sirico: Politicians are not our leaders in a rightly ordered society, they are our followers … Not all views of culture are equal. but we can’t engage socially on our disagreements because everything...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved