Interesting opinion from The Guardian‘s economics editor on China and US industrial policy, which I am sort of realizing is what I’m using instead of “protectionism” because it’s more palatable to me.
«The thinking behind the tough stance being adopted by the US goes as follows. First, it was a mistake to assume that China would become more liberal once it was plugged into the global economy.
Second, allowing China’s rapid industrial growth has hollowed out manufacturing in the US. Third, China’s model does not lend itself to free thinking and innovation, but instead relies on intellectual property being imported, often through unfair means, from the west. Fourth, it makes sense to make it as hard as possible for China to acquire this knowhow. Fifth, China’s aggressive use of industrial policy needs to be matched by the US.
If that all means the US becoming more interventionist and more protectionist, then so be it. In these circumstances, interventionism is justified and protectionism is good.
Biden thinks parts of the US economy are too strategically important to allow them to fall into Chinese hands and he is right about that. He also thinks the US needs to build up its own industrial strength and he is right about that too.»
Here, Read This 