On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump was sworn in as 45th President of the United States, promising a radical and deep change on the national and international scene. His inaugural speech marked the beginning of an era characterized by a confrontation with traditional political conventions. One of the central promises of its administration – a return to an economic “golden age” through protectionist policies – has deeply resonated in part of the American population. But what does this promise really reveal on the economic and social landscape of the United States?
### Protectionism: a response to deep worries
Far from being an isolated phenomenon, protectionism advocated by Trump is part of a global context of growing mistrust towards globalization. The last decades have seen many countries, including the United States, turning to economic policies that promote local production to the detriment of trade deemed unbalanced. This dynamic has often been fueled by concerns about the loss of jobs, the stagnation of wages and an increasing iniquity of wealth.
These concerns are not unfounded. The impact of relocation on the manufacturing industry, for example, has had devastating effects in certain communities. Harvard University Robert Lawrence economic analyst stressed that the closure of factories has increased an increase in unemployment and a feeling of economic despair among workers. Faced with this reality, Trump’s speech found an echo with many Americans.
### Economic golden age: realities and illusions
As part of his promises, Trump spoke of an economic “golden age”, a concept which, for many, evokes a period of past prosperity which has never fully materialized in contemporary reality. His vision is based on the idea that the protection of American industries will allow employment resurgence and economic growth. However, this approach raises crucial questions.
Economists question the long -term viability of such policies. Many experts emphasize that protectionism could cause competitive disadvantages, whether by increased price inflation or by negative repercussions on international trade relations. Indeed, remaining locked up in an economic bubble could harm the innovation and competitiveness of American industries worldwide.
### Debates around social consequences
From a social point of view, the rise of Trump and its protectionist promises have also highlighted fractures within American society. Economic nationalism can generate tensions between different social classes, between urban and rural people, but also between various ethnic origins. Dialogue around economic inequalities has increased, asking questions about the place of the individual in the world economy.
The challenge is to balance job protection with the need for inclusive development. Initiatives aimed at reclassifying workers from the declining sectors are essential, but they also require strong government support and solid-public partnerships.
### to an uncertain future: what solutions?
While we look to the future, the question that arises is that of lasting solutions. How can the United States develop an economic policy that is both protectionist and open, guaranteeing job security while supporting innovation? The debate remains open, and it is crucial to include various voices in this reflection.
The sharing of the profits of globalization and a redesigned by educational policies and requalification are possible axes to explore. Regional development models, which take into account local economic specificities, could constitute a promising path.
### Conclusion: a delicate balance to navigate
Donald Trump’s promise of a new economic “golden age” has supported deep aspirations within the electorate. However, the implementation of such promises requires momentum beyond political slogans. By sailing in this complex landscape, it is imperative to adopt a balanced approach, which takes into account the varied needs of the population, while exploring solutions that favor both employment and innovation. In an interconnected world, the challenge remains to combine protection and openness, while remaining attentive to the social repercussions of each decision. This path is strewn with pitfalls, but it is essential for a shared and prosperous future.