The Statism of Donald Trump

Many libertarians hope that Donald Trump would favor many free market policies. The claim by these libertarians was that, aside from obvious exceptions like eminent domain and tariffs, he was basically sympathetic to the free market. Unfortunately, these hopes have not been fulfilled, and in this week’s article, I’ll try to show this. Before going ahead, though, I’d like to avert a possible misunderstanding. The issue we have to deal with is Trump’s policy, not whether he was a marginally more acceptable choice for president than his Democratic Party opponent, the “woke” Kamala Harris. Many people regarded her as a repellent figure; but, to reiterate, this isn’t our topic.

I mentioned “obvious deviations” like tariffs, but the fact that a deviation is obvious doesn’t address the question of how serious the deviation is. An as the great Ron Unz points out, the deviation is very serious indeed: “His outrageous ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs were announced on April 2nd, but it would have been far more appropriate for them to have been released on April Fools’ Day. The gigantic international tariffs that he imposed apparently based upon personal whim were quickly retracted a few days later, but then regularly restored, raised, and lowered over and over again during the months that followed. Not only was this the most bizarre sequence of massive international tax changes on trillions of dollars of goods that the world had ever seen, but all of it was a total violation of American constitutional law. . . Across thousands of years, the world has seen many important countries ruled by absolute monarchs or all-powerful dictators, with some of these leaders even considered deranged. But I can’t recall any past example in which a major nation’s tax, tariff, or tribute policies have undergone such rapid and sudden changes, moving up and down by huge amounts apparently based upon personal whim. Certainly Caligula never did anything so peculiar, nor Louis XIV nor Genghis Khan nor anyone else who comes to mind. Lopping off the heads of a few random government officials was one thing, but drastic changes in national financial policies were generally taken much more seriously. I don’t think that Tamerlane ever suddenly raised the tribute he demanded from his terrified subjects by a factor of ten, then a few days later lowered it back down by a factor of two.”

Trump is also an ardent inflationist. He says a criterion for the new Chair of the Fed is that the choice must favor lowering interest rates. We know from Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT) that this will generate an artificial boom that must eventually crash and cause a depression. According to the New York Times, this is what Trump said: “President Trump said on Tuesday that he wanted the next chair of the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates if financial markets are doing well, rather than raising borrowing costs to temper any investor exuberance. The Fed sets interest rates with an aim to foster a healthy labor market and maintain low, stable inflation, but it also keeps a close eye on financial stability risks. In a social media post on Tuesday, Trump, who is in the process of selecting the next chair, said that the Fed should not ‘kill rallies, which could lift our Nation by 10, 15, and even 20 GDP points in a year — and maybe even more than that!’ Trump added: “Anybody that disagrees with me will never be the Fed Chairman!”

The free market should never be confused with “crony capitalism,” a system of government-business partnership, studied by Hunter Lewis and Shawn Ritenour, among others, in which the government owns or subsidizes corrupt corporations for their mutual profit at the expense of the public. Trump has pursued this policy to unprecedented lengths. As the economic historian Adam Tooze has pointed out, “When President Trump ran for re-election in 2024, he and his family already had vast business interests stretching from Manhattan office towers to a golf course in Ireland to hotel deals as far away as Vietnam. The president’s second term has brought a major expansion of that empire, with forays into cryptocurrency, communications, financial products and now, a fusion-power deal. Ventures launched since Trump’s re-election generated at least $4 billion in proceeds and paper wealth for the family as of December, according to company statements and securities filings. It’s unprecedented for a president to have such far-reaching business interests while in office, including in areas his administration regulates.”

Let’s turn to the issue the great Murray Rothbard thought was the most important of all—war or peace. In his view, it’s almost always better to preserve peace rather than go to war. For this reason, America should follow a policy of nonintervention in conflicts that don’t involve a direct invasion or the immediate threat of one. Trump’s policy is the opposite of this. He seeks to establish American hegemony all over the world. Professor Jeffrey Sachs, a renowned authority on national security whose advice is sought by many foreign governments, says: “The 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) recently released by President Donald Trump presents itself as a blueprint for renewed American strength. It is dangerously misconceived in four ways. First, the NSS is anchored in grandiosity: the belief that the United States enjoys unmatched supremacy in every key dimension of power. Second, it is based on a starkly Machiavellian view of the world, treating other nations as instruments to be manipulated for American advantage. Third, it rests on a naïve nationalism that dismisses international law and institutions as encumbrances on US sovereignty rather than as frameworks that enhance US and global security together. Fourth, it signals a thuggery in Trump’s use of the CIA and military. Within days of the NSS’s publication, the US brazenly seized a tanker carrying Venezuelan oil on the high seas—on the flimsy grounds that the vessel had previously violated US sanctions against Iran.” Why do we have the right to impose sanctions against Iran or punish nations that don’t accept them?

Professor Sachs goes on: “The seizure was not a defensive measure to avert an imminent threat. Nor is it remotely legal to seize vessels on the high seas because of unilateral US sanctions. Only the UN Security Council has such authority. Instead, the seizure is an illegal act designed to force regime change in Venezuela. It follows Trump’s declaration that he has directed the CIA to carry out covert operations inside Venezuela to destabilize the regime. American security will not be strengthened by acting like a bully. It will be weakened—structurally, morally, and strategically. A great power that frightens its allies, coerces its neighbors, and disregards international rules ultimately isolates itself. The NSS, in other words, is not just an exercise in hubris on paper. It is rapidly being translated into brazen practice.”

Last but not least, let’s not forget the shocking inhumanity shown by Trump and his minion Secretary of War Hegseth in their barbarous killing of two survivors of a of a drone attack on their flimsy boat. Wars almost always bring atrocities with them, and unfortunately, Trump’s war on Venezuela is no exception. According to an account published by the Washington Post on November 28, “As two men clung to a stricken, burning ship targeted by SEAL Team 6, the Joint Special Operations commander followed the defense secretary’s order to leave no survivors. The longer the U.S. surveillance aircraft followed the boat, the more confident intelligence analysts watching from command centers became that the 11 people on board were ferrying drugs. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. ‘The order was to kill everybody,’ one of them said. A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck. Hegseth’s order, which has not been previously reported, adds another dimension to the campaign against suspected drug traffickers. People were aghast at this barbarous display, and in response, the Trump Administration put out a transparently lame excuse. It tried to shift the blame to the admiral in charge of the operation. ;President Donald Trump said on Sunday that he would not have wanted a second strike on the boat and said Hegseth denied giving such an order. But White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said on Monday that Hegseth had authorized Admiral Frank Bradley to conduct the strikes on September 2. ‘Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes. Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated,’ Leavitt said. Leavitt said the strike was conducted in ‘self defense’ to protect U.S. interests, took place in international waters and was in line with the law of armed conflict. ‘This administration has designated these narco- terrorists as foreign terrorist organizations,’ Leavitt said. Starting in September, the U.S. military has carried out at least 19 strikes against suspected drug vessels in the Caribbean and off the Pacific coasts of Latin America, killing at least 76 people.”  Blowing up people who are clinging to a boat so that they won’t drown is cowardly and dastardly. Only those utterly without a conscience could do such a thing.

Let’s do everything we can to promote a genuine free market and peace, as Murray Rothbard has taught us. Let’s reject the statism of Donald Trump!

The Best of Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.