Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Free Trade is Dead. This is What Should Replace It. (Rough Cut) (Patreon)

Published:
2025-08-27 09:11:50
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Downloads

  • 522429144.mp4

Missing 1 full-res photo, 1 video, as this post has not yet been imported.

Content

Thumbnail and title are WIP.

Suggestions also welcome, ideas so far:

  • The Death of Free Trade

  • Is Free Trade Dead/Finished/Over?

ly xoxo

Files

Previews only

Comments

Martian Mochi

Free Trade is Dead. Long Live Free Trade/Nationalism !

24601

Phenomenal video! I must admit I found your American accent a little distracting. It also led to an unintentional joke when you used an American accent for the quotation and then said "in English" (meaning in colloquial language rather than academic) before speaking in your natural accent. If you enjoy doing voices, feel free to disregard this nitpick!

Duncan

1) season 2 of the wire is correctly rated 2) never watched west wing didnt realize but not surprised at how blatant liberal propaganda it is

Pedro Tomás Antunes

This was such a great video, very well crafted, as usual. I basically attended a political economy historical lesson about my very own country ahaha. I’ve noticed there has been some discussion about the possible return to fashion of Listian protectionist policies, ever since the Covid-19 lockdown exposed the fragilities of an interdependent global commerce, but specially with the latest developments regarding Trump’s tariffs on imported goods and the talks around/and “threats” of dedollarization. Perhaps that’s a theme you could introduce and problematize? And although you explained it, maybe you could add a theoretical description of unequal exchange theory between Global North/South for didactic purposes, in the latter half of the essay. The script and execution are super solid, these are just for your consideration, since you asked for it :)

Andrei Karakozov

It seems that sound is only in the left speaker for the most part of the video. Also at 40:05 - acceptable to the Portuguese government

Andrei Karakozov

Thanks, this was a great video! So, international trade is projection of power and politics all the way down. And countries' leaders like Trump and Putin are now open about it, as kings in 17-19 centuries were. Mainstream economists in their turn either don't take negative consequences of "free trade" seriously or are hypocritical about them. But does the international trade have to be this way? For me it would be very interesting to learn about some normative, progressive vision. Also there was a short segment at the end of the video discussing the role of organizations, WTO and EU were mentioned. I guess this all is getting deep into the political economy rabbit hole, but I would gladly watch a second part video about the role of international institutes on global trade.

Sofia

Great video! It was very clear and flowed nicely. Nat's segments were also very interesting, and I particularly liked the discussion of mercantilism - I feel it ties in well with the segment on Trump's bizarre trade deficit obsession. As a thought, could it be interesting to steelman the idea that trade can bring peace a bit more? You mention the EU at the end, which is often touted as an example of an economic alliance that became a political union, thus (theoretically) ensuring peace between nations that had been at war for most of their histories. I think there is truth in the fact that economic interdependance reduces the chances of outright conflict between countries, but the question is how long that can last, and at what the other costs may be. If you're at all interested, this article (in French, sorry), sort of debunks the myth of pacification through trade in the case of the EU : https://journals.openedition.org/asterion/3952 . These are obviously themes you already touch on, but I guess my point is also that it would maybe be interesting to discuss a case where the parties in the trade deal seem on more equal footing than 19th century Portugal and Britain. Though perhaps the conclusion would be that no two countries are ever really on equal footing.

Cubba Jeron

Only thing I am qualified to comment about is Victoria 3. I had the same observation about Trump's rhetoric mirroring the nebulous "Damage Relations" in the game. In the game, such action is usually done against countries in order to declare war on them... I really hope that is not the long-term plan in real life. The Victoria 3 footage is already out of date compared to the latest DLC, which changed the way trade works in the game. Trade was split into two systems. The first one is a mostly automatic trade center building which tries to trade goods between markets. The second one is the ability to enact "Diplomatic Treaties", arbitrary agreements that countries can enforce on each other, which can include the transfer of goods between markets, law changes, permanent/temporary land swaps, etc. The update supports the thesis of the video way better than the old system.

YeBoiFazz

WAIT HAIR!!!!!!!

Unlearning Economics
>>185437157

I would say that trade bringing peace, or being a part of it, is a better argument. I think that when countries make deals they ar eoften gesturing towards peace and cementing that peace with material agreements. Obviously, nothing can guarantee no war but my support for trade has always been as much political as economic.

Nagarath

Global trade is dead, long live global trade

taylor

This is sort of tangential to the discussion of free trade, but inspired by the assertion that we need to consider trade deals in their context, not forgetting that they are inherently political: I think the missing link in the "vibe-cession" ( where despite the fact that people are objectively better off, but are more sour on the perception of the economy) discussion is that we are forgetting that peoples views are not static apolitical things. The de-tethering of economic indicators and perceptions of the economy I believe can be explained by an awakening of political consciousness in the public spurred by the pandemic. In other words, if one is raised by and buys into capitalism as a generally meritocratic system, then a pandemic lays bare all the faults and failures of the system( that have always been there) and people move ideologically away from seeing capitalism as it is taught to us, then it seems natural to me that, given the same financial well being and economic strength, that person will view the economy more negatively. Their faith in the system has been broken and the same metrics when viewed through a different ideological lens, yields a different perception. This ties into how I've conceptualized the gap between the data and the surveys: that despite doing better, people are realizing that its not enough, that them and their friends and families are not getting treated by the economic system as they feel they should be, leads to a net negative shift in their perception. There is also the matter of feeling more insecure about the future, even if the present is nominally better. The context of society and the economy is changing: layoffs are more random and common, corporations and politicians are more blatantly corrupt. Note: I am not in the economics field, just a layperson trying to grapple with and reconcile my lived experience and the hard (er) data, so I'm sure I am repeating things that others have already brought up and been refuted. TLDR: let's not forget that you cannot separate politics from economic perception surveys.

Unlearning Economics
>>188054763

I totally agree with this, it's partially about expectations and the shattering of the 'American Dream' (even outside of America). There was a collective "oh so we don't need to be at work all the time" in the early pandemic that's been fogotten. Specifically in the pandemic, a lot of support was extended and then withdrawn. We had things like childcare in the USA, which was cut and that contributed to the discontent.