The Trump administration's industrial policy is a branch of the conservative industrial policy system. It reflects the maturation and expansion of conservative ideology, manifesting in both the industrial and consumer sectors. As long as conservative ideology exists, under the influence of a conservative cultural wave, such industrial policies and consumer patterns are bound to emerge, and the world will inevitably witness their arrival.
Conservative industrial policy is a component of de-globalization and is driven by it. To understand this viewpoint, one can adopt the historical realist perspective and observe developments from the past to the present. Since the early 20th century, the United States was among the first countries to implement mass production using interchangeable parts and organized production elements. World War II significantly boosted manufacturing capacity while also dealing a devastating blow to its competitors. After the war, more and more Americans joined the middle class, which spurred a substantial increase in spending on durable goods, such as cars and home appliances needed by new houses. At that time, the U.S. became the largest consumer of products made by American manufacturers.
Many of these products were considered high-tech at the time, such as dishwashers, televisions, and jet aircraft, which were often the results of wartime innovations. At the same time, thanks to the high school education movement that began in the early 20th century, the U.S. had the most educated workforce in the world, which also played a significant role in shaping its consumer culture. Starting in the 1950s, the status of manufacturing in the U.S. economy began to decline. This was because Americans became more affluent and started allocating more of their spending toward services such as travel, dining, and healthcare. There were only so many cars one could buy, hence people began to spend on services instead. As consumer spending on services grew, so did the number of jobs in the service sector. More and more people transitioned into service-related fields such as hotels, banks, law firms, and hospitals. From the mid-1960s to the early 1980s, manufacturing employment remained relatively flat, while service sector employment kept growing. This is how the decline of manufacturing and the rise of the service economy in the U.S. took shape.
The problem is that with the advent of globalization, not only did more manufacturing jobs leave the U.S., but more people, including those in manufacturing as well as in the service sector saw their incomes steadily decline. Many fell from the affluent class to the lower end of the middle class, or even dropped out of the middle class altogether into poverty. This situation not only bred widespread dissatisfaction, but also cast doubt on the so-called "prosperity" and the globalization that supposedly brought it about. As a result, the tide of de-globalization emerged. People began hoping for the return of manufacturing and for the restoration of widespread, high-income opportunities. At its core, this reflects a deeper desire: the revival of the American middle class. "Middle-class revival" has become the social foundation of the growing influence of conservative ideology in the U.S., and it is not necessarily about the traditional concept of manufacturing.
Currently, the Trump administration's conservative industrial policy is uncertain and marked by a rather rough political façade. It has many obvious flaws and cannot be explained well, hence the intellectual community does not side with Trump. He lacks a key, persuasive support group within American society and there is essentially no one offering a coherent interpretation on his behalf. In this context, people easily conflate the return of manufacturing to the U.S. with the conservative goal of middle-class revival. A number of reels and videos on such issue have become viral, including one AI-generated one showing obese Americans sitting at sewing machines, awkwardly stitching jeans. Of course, Americans trying hard to tighten screws on assembly lines are also a common and humorous sight in such videos.
In fact, the return of manufacturing to the U.S. is possible, yet it will not be the labor-intensive kind of manufacturing. Instead, it will be high-tech manufacturing equipped with various intelligent machines. With modern construction technology, even bricklaying can now be done by mature robotics rather than traditional masons. As early as 2011, Ultimaker began selling additive manufacturing systems priced between USD 1,300 and USD 2,750. These production systems can be applied in various fields including aerospace, construction, automotive, defense, dentistry, and more. General Electric adopted high-end 3D modeling early on to produce highly complex turbine components, so high-tech manufacturing is far from a fantasy. This is the kind of American high-tech manufacturing that Trump envisions. What he truly fears is that this type of manufacturing might emerge in other parts of the world, especially in China.
However, can this kind of high-tech manufacturing really help the struggling populations in rural America?
The answer is yes, and the solution is quite straightforward. It lies in the same measures used by countries around the world: transfer payments, welfare programs, and investment in rural infrastructure. This approach is indeed reliable; the key lies in sustainable implementation and sufficient capital support. As long as a society's productive foundation is solidly established, these issues can be effectively addressed.
Another issue is price. Conservative industrial policy inevitably brings about price increases due to industrial restructuring. As things stand, moderate price increases are not necessarily a problem. In the U.S., an inflation rate of around 4% is not considered a major concern, so long as income levels rise in tandem. In other words, what really matters is maintaining a reasonably strong level of economic growth. To ensure that incomes keep up with rising prices, full employment is essential. When there is a labor market supply shortage, wage growth across society tends to follow naturally and is relatively easy to achieve. For Trump, the most straightforward approach is to promote the return of manufacturing while simultaneously restricting immigration. This would naturally tighten labor supply, making wage growth more attainable. When combined with tax cuts, this strategy becomes even more effective.
The conservative mode of production is not a low-cost one. For society to align with this kind of higher-cost production, subtle changes in consumption habits are necessary. In the U.S., such a conservative consumption mindset is beginning to take shape, and shifts in fashion are already emerging. At a fashion and design festival, a livestream host interviewed several attendees. One person pointed to his suit and said, "This suit was expensive, but I've worn it for many years". Another proudly showed off his designer leather shoes, saying, "I've had these for seven or eight years". "Expensive but durable" is the new trend in consumer fashion. Even The Wall Street Journal's fashion section has started to reflect this change, with headlines like: "Cool Guys 'Love Grandpa Style'".
This shift is clearly bad news for the producers of so-called "fast fashion". Brands like ZARA, Uniqlo, SHEIN, and others built on a model of quick online purchases, fast consumption, and rapid disposal, are no longer considered fashionable. In contrast, conservative consumer culture places more value on durability and the "old money aesthetic". If this trend continues, manufacturers of cheap, fast-moving consumer goods may face an existential threat, unless they can pivot to create durable, premium brands of their own. Durability and high prices are not only a response to rising costs but also a way of aligning with what people are willing to spend. That is the subtlety of consumer culture: it adapts both to inflation and to the evolving psychology of the wallet.
Ultimately, at the heart of conservative industrial policy lies conservative culture; it is both driven and shaped by cultural forces. The success of conservative industrial policy depends on the strength of that culture, particularly the foundation of conservative consumer values. Without the support of a conservative consumer culture, such policies are unlikely to succeed.
In today's America, a conservative consumer culture is indeed on the rise, which bodes well for the implementation of conservative industrial policies. However, it is clear that this cultural shift still needs time to fully take root. Culture, after all, is something that develops gradually. For this reason, the Trump administration's industrial policy still appears somewhat overly aggressive, and some degree of pullback or adjustment is entirely possible. That said, conservative industrial policy has already become a broader trend, perhaps even a bipartisan consensus in the U.S. In the past, Democrats had also repeatedly called for higher tariffs. From Nancy Pelosi to Barack Obama, even Bernie Sanders, many prominent Democrats argued for stronger trade protections. Moving forward, the U.S. is very likely to continue evolving in this direction. The pace may vary, but the trajectory is unlikely to change.
