In the strange theater of 21st century American politics, tariffs have taken center stage. Since February 1st, the country has been embroiled in an ever-escalating global trade war with multiple countries retaliating against the Trump administration’s sanctions. Before we dive into the events of the last few months, let’s first clarify what a tariff is. According to CNN, a tariff is a tax on goods bought and imported from a foreign country, “typically structured as a percentage of the value of the import and can vary based on where the goods are coming from and what the products are.”
In theory, tariffs should protect domestic industries from foreign competition by making imported goods more expensive, thus encouraging consumers to buy local. In practice, they often raise prices for consumers, provoke retaliation, and rarely achieve long-term industrial rejuvenation.
In fact, it could be argued that the current administration has thrown away any semblance of protecting American industries and dollars in favor of an intense flavor of nationalism that smacks of attempting to bully its way into re-establishing America’s understanding of itself as a global leader and economic powerhouse.
So how did this all start? On February 1st, President Trump announced an executive order that would impose 10 percent tariffs on China and 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico, citing undocumented immigration and drug trafficking as reason enough to declare a national emergency. The order was met with immediate pushback, causing Trump to suspend the Canada–Mexico tariffs for 30 days while the emergency was evaluated. Since that day, things have rapidly escalated. China predictably announced a mass of countermeasures against American imports as soon as the first executive order was signed. On February 10th, Trump imposed a minimum 25 percent tax on steel imports and raised aluminum tariffs to match. Then, on March 4th as the 30 day suspension passed, Trump implemented his promised tariffs against Mexico and Canada, while simultaneously doubling tariffs on Chinese imports to 20 percent. All three countries initiated retaliatory measures. On March 12th, the steel and aluminum tariffs went into effect. The European Union retaliated with a number of measures, including the threat of a 50 percent tax on American whiskey, causing Trump to threaten a 200 percent tariff on European wine, champagne and spirits. Eventually, April 2nd saw Trump implement a 34 percent tax on China, a 20 percent tax on the EU, 25 percent on South Korea, 24 percent on Japan and 32 percent on Taiwan.
After mass panic over a recession and an economic collapse, Trump announced a 90 day suspension of all reciprocal tariffs, with the exception being those on China. The pause was meant to be celebrated, but economist Joe Brusuelas isn’t convinced that it’s enough to reverse the coming recession. In an interview with CNN, Brusuelas said, “‘many [clients] are going to choose just to leave the products at the docks — they don’t have the cash reserves to pay the tax,’ he said. ‘So, we’re going to see dislocation across the economy driven by an adverse supply shock.’”
In a cult, the central narrative isn’t debated—it’s accepted. Followers are drawn to the clarity, the absolutes, and the emotional gratification of “us versus them.” This same dynamic has emerged in modern tariff politics. Politicians rally their base by portraying tariffs as a form of economic self-defense—a shield against globalism, foreign invaders, and the perceived theft of national greatness.
Facts—like economic data showing job losses, rising consumer costs, or retaliatory damage to domestic exporters—are waved away. The cult doesn’t need proof. It needs belief.
Cult movements often grow in times of fear or uncertainty — and trade anxiety is fertile ground. The pace of globalization, the rise of China, the decline of manufacturing jobs, and the COVID-19 pandemic all fed a sense of national vulnerability. Tariffs, in this light, offer an emotionally satisfying answer: close the gates, protect our own, punish the cheaters.
Tariffs are not inherently evil. Used carefully, they can play a role in strategic industries or as leverage in negotiations. But when they become a belief system, they stop being tools and start becoming traps.
In that sense, we should be wary of any policy that becomes sacred, any leader who sells emotion over evidence, and any movement that replaces dialogue with doctrine. Trade is complex. So is the world. And the solutions we need won’t come from chants and flags—they’ll come from thought, effort, and, perhaps, a little humility.
