A political perspective as a tax advisor on trade as the engine of our economy and our society: 

In a world of increasing trade conflicts and protectionist reflexes, a central principle of modern economic order is being forgotten: free trade. What is often understood today as a technocratic set of rules or a neoliberal market instrument was once much more – a societal, democratic, and even peace-promoting project.

The current trade dispute between the USA and China – ignited by tariffs under Donald Trump – clearly illustrates how fragile the global order has become. While the economic consequences so far are moderate (according to the IMF, global growth is expected to decline by 0.5 percent), the political message is far more serious: trade issues are no longer an expression of cooperative world order but have become instruments of power political self-assertion.

A look into history shows: free trade has never been merely a question of economic policy. In the 19th century, especially in Britain, free trade was part of national identity – almost a religion. The abolition of the Corn Laws in 1846 was not just an economic decision but a moral and societal statement. Trade was seen as an expression of progress, justice, and democratic control over economic power.

Britain, then the leading trading nation, opened its markets despite increasing competition – convinced that tariffs ultimately harmed itself and the population. The idea: free trade protects against corrupt lobbies, strengthens consumers, and creates international connections that make armed conflicts less likely.

Consumers as a political force

Before World War I, trade policy was central mass politics. Free trade movements mobilized broad segments of the population – from workers to housewives and entrepreneurs. The "consumer" was politically charged: as a representative of the public interest, regardless of social status or voting rights. In Britain, the "cheap loaf" of white bread became a symbol of quality of life and an argument against protectionist efforts. This debate was also held in Germany – albeit with a different focus. Social Democrats like Eduard Bernstein saw free trade as a means to strengthen the lower classes.

Of course: free trade has never been a万能 solution. The close economic entanglement between Britain and Germany did not prevent World War I. The global south also had good reasons to rely on temporary protectionism to protect its own industries. Yet even leftist movements like Che Guevara's did not fight against trade itself, but for fair access – thus for a just form of free trade.

After 1945, the USA institutionalized a rules-based world trade order with GATT and later the WTO. For decades, consumers worldwide benefited from lower tariffs and expanding markets. But with the rise of globalization-critical movements – from Seattle 1999 to Occupy Wall Street – the image changed: free trade was increasingly perceived as a vehicle for elites rather than an expression of democratic participation.

The current renaissance of tariffs – discussed by Trump and recently also in Europe – shows: free trade has lost its emotional and moral anchoring. It is increasingly negotiated technocratically, thereby losing its political impact. Yet this very impact was its greatest lever: as a tool to contain monopolistic power, to empower the individual as a consumer and citizen – and as a bridge between nations.

In America, today some states are calling for more order in customs policy, not its abolition. In Europe, people are remembering historical successes – without credibly communicating them politically. And worldwide, there is a lack of a clear vision of what trade can achieve in the future – apart from growth.

What does this mean for us?

Free trade must be thought of politically again. Not as a pure market principle but as a societal infrastructure that supports democracy, transparency, and peace.

The consumer is more than a customer. Those who strengthen free trade empower the individual against cartels, corporations, and state arbitrariness.

Regional agreements are not a step back. They can build bridges when global organizations like the WTO become blocked – provided they preserve the spirit of the open market.

Protectionism does not create resilience. Economic self-assertion through trade barriers is rarely sustainable – and always risky for international stability.

Conclusion

Historically, free trade was a tool for the democratization of the economy, for promoting peace, and for limiting monopolistic power. This perspective has largely disappeared today – displaced by short-term power political interests and populist reflexes. Yet especially in a time of global uncertainties, the idea should not be lost that economic openness can achieve more than growth: namely trust, stability, and cooperation.

Webersinn Behr & Cie. stands for a holistic understanding of economy and society. Our consulting in international trade and tax law is not only rule-based – but value-driven. Because we believe: those who succeed sustainably are the ones who do not forget the human beings within the system.