Amerexit: Trump’s version of failed Brexit
You can’t go home again
Gordon L. Weil
Ten years ago, the British decided to leave the EU. It was a bold but flawed move, and recovery
will take many years, if ever.
The seeds that yielded Brexit have been planted on this side
of the pond. The U.S. version might be
labelled Amerexit. Britain left Europe;
the U.S. is leaving the world.
Brexit was driven by three forces – sovereignty, identity
and history. The U.S. is now being driven by the same
forces.
In the British
referendum, the majority opposed compromises with British sovereignty required
by the EU’s rules and courts. Reverence
for the monarchy, though outmoded compared with other countries, promoted a sense
of special status for its laws and customs. England dominated the result, while Scotland
and Northern Ireland rejected British exceptionalism.
The vast and unrestricted, EU single market gave British
production access to a huge market, a real benefit to small businesses. But a single market must have a single set of
rules, and that took exclusive control away from Parliament and the U.K. courts. That change was a price too high to pay, even
if markets were lost.
Throughout its history, the U.S. has been reluctant to enter
into international agreements that could limit its sovereignty. It might accept accords only when they served
American interests, and the U.S. could dominate.
NATO provided the U.S. a buffer against Soviet expansion and
a guarantee that European nations would no longer drag it into war. The organization, always led by the U.S.,
successfully served both purposes. But
its success led President Trump to mistakenly see it simply as a European plan for
free-riding on American military protection.
Similarly, the U.N., created by an American initiative,
aimed at reducing the chances of war, and maintained U.S. global influence. It ended or contained some conflicts and provided
humanitarian aid in line with U.S. priorities.
Trump’s policy is “America First,” and he seeks to quit international
agreements. Other countries see the
policy as “America Alone,” a return to isolationism. But Trump sees it as “America Only,” where others
are expected to fall in line with unilateral U.S. policy, imposed by a superpower. That explains his disappointment that NATO
did not back his Iran war.
The EU requires the free movement of labor among its member
countries, just as within the U.S. But
the Brexiteers worried about immigrants from Poland and elsewhere in Eastern
Europe, who could undermine the essence of British identity.
U.S. opposition to immigration reflects a similar concern
about new Americans changing the nation’s ethnic mix. American identity has become more narrowly
defined, while the flow of immigrants, legal or not, has slowed.
To maintain the U.S. as a white, Christian country, as he
sees its historic origin, he prefers immigrants from Norway or the white
population of South Africa over Muslims and people of color.
The third focus might easily have been dominant, overriding
any potential costs from Britain’s leaving Europe. Great Britain was once among the world’s
great powers. Its empire extended around
the globe. It is a permanent member of
the U.N. Security Council. In a nation
whose military has more royal parade horses than battle tanks, the trappings of
empire still matter.
The EU thwarted recognition of British history. As an historical great power, Britain might emerge
again to rise above being a mere member of Europe’s club. Its worldwide recognition could bring it
trade deals that would surpass the gains from being an EU member. For
Brexiteers, “Leave” meant gaining rightful independence, while “Remain” made
that impossible
Britain simply could not get over its history and adhered to
an exalted view of itself not shared by other.
To the leavers, the EU was a trade deal that came at too high a cost for
a great country.
Trump’s Make American Great Again is much the same. In his view, glorious days in America’s past must
be recovered. The country was “Great”
and it should be great “Again.” To
achieve this goal, the tariff policy of President McKinley should be revived as
should the territorial policy of President Polk. Its view of itself is decreasingly shared by
others.
Brexit is failing. Trade
did not grow. Small businesses closed. Prosperity did not occur. Immigrants from
outside Europe entered to staff essential services, especially healthcare. The military became almost irrelevant. If Brexit is not yet a catastrophe, it is a
serious handicap.
Amerexit is also beginning to fail. Tariffs do not improve the trade balance. The U.S. loses the support of traditional
European allies, who are realizing the changing nature of war and the Russian
threat. The limitations of American
power have become clear. Domestically, government
policies make personal lives more costly.
Brexit and Amerexit fail for the same reason – their failure
to recognize and adjust to change. You can’t go
home again.
