This is a question or topic that has been buried to such an extent that the average American has never heard of it and, yet, there is more than sufficient reason to view it as being of critical importance.

The American System of Economics and Its Modern Echoes

(from OpenAI)

Origin and Key Components

The American System of Economics, primarily advocated by Henry Clay in the early to mid-19th century, was a significant economic plan designed to promote industry and infrastructure development in the United States. The system was based on three main components:

1. Protective Tariffs: High tariffs on imported goods to protect American industries from foreign competition. This measure was intended to encourage domestic production and reduce reliance on imports.


2. National Bank: The establishment of a strong national bank to provide a stable currency and facilitate commerce. The Second Bank of the United States was a key institution in this regard.


3. Internal Improvements: Federal investment in infrastructure projects such as roads, canals, and later railroads to improve transportation and promote economic growth.

Impact on Development

The American System had a profound impact on the development of the United States, contributing to its transformation into an economic powerhouse. By promoting industrialization and infrastructure development, the system helped lay the foundation for the nation's economic growth. The protective tariffs shielded nascent American industries from foreign competition, allowing them to develop and thrive.

Federal investment in infrastructure projects connected different regions of the country, facilitating trade and commerce. This connectivity was crucial for the economic integration of the nation and the efficient movement of goods and people. The national bank provided a stable financial system, which was essential for supporting the expanding economy.

However, the American System also sparked controversy and opposition, particularly from the South and the West. Critics argued that protective tariffs and federal investments disproportionately benefited the industrial North at the expense of agricultural regions. They were also concerned about the expansion of federal power and the potential for government overreach.

Modern Echoes: Comparing to Donald Trump's Economic Ideas

Although Donald Trump has not explicitly linked his economic policies to the American System, several aspects of his approach bear a resemblance to its principles.

Protective Tariffs

Trump's implementation of tariffs on various imported goods, most notably from China, echoes the protective tariffs advocated by the American System. These tariffs aimed to protect American industries and jobs by making imported goods more expensive and less competitive compared to domestic products.

Infrastructure Investment

Trump emphasized the need for significant investment in American infrastructure, proposing large-scale projects to improve roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure. This focus on internal improvements aligns with the American System's emphasis on federal investment in infrastructure to promote economic growth.

Nationalistic Economic Policies

Trump's "America First" agenda prioritized domestic industries and aimed to reduce reliance on foreign imports, resonating with the self-sufficiency goals of the American System. His policies sought to revitalize American manufacturing and bring jobs back to the United States.

Differing Contexts

While there are similarities, it's important to recognize the differing contexts between the 19th and 21st centuries. The economic challenges and global dynamics have evolved significantly, making direct comparisons imperfect. However, the underlying principles of protectionism, infrastructure development, and economic nationalism continue to resonate.

Conclusion

The American System of Economics played a crucial role in shaping the early economic development of the United States, promoting industrialization and infrastructure growth. While controversial, its legacy is evident in the nation's transformation into an economic powerhouse.

In modern times, aspects of the American System can be seen in the economic policies of leaders like Donald Trump, who have emphasized protective tariffs, infrastructure investment, and nationalistic economic policies. By understanding the historical context and principles of the American System, we can gain insights into contemporary economic debates and policies.

(end OpenAI take)

Michael Moore Describes Trump"s Version of an American System

The British Take the Dim View...

The British empire that spanned the world in the 1800s was based on a system of financial, monetary, and trade exploitation that they understood would not be able to compete with the American system of economics on level ground. At numerous points in time, they showed themselves to be committed to the destruction of that American system.

Promethean Action group:

https://www.prometheanaction.com

American system of economics:

https://www.prometheanaction.com/trumps-second-term-the-heritage-foundation-or-the-american-system/

https://archive.prometheanpac.com/20140407/henry-carey-american-vs-british-systems

PrometheanAction//LaRouuche take on the American System

Below are excerpts from American System economist Henry C. Carey's book, The Harmony of Interests, written in 1851, in which he elaborates the difference between the American System and the British System. Henry Carey, the son of Mathew Carey, who had begun his career as an agent of Benjamin Franklin in Ireland during America's revolution against the British, became the leading economist within Abraham Lincoln's new Republican Party and the intellectual author of Lincoln's program to save the Union and defeat the British-backed civil war. The "American System" embodied the principles of physical economy and credit founded by Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury Secretary of the United States.

Henry Carey describes the situation in the mid 1800s:

"Two systems are before the world; the one looks to increasing the proportion of persons and of capital engaged in trade and transportation, and therefore to diminishing the proportion engaged in producing commodities with which to trade, with necessarily diminished return to the labour of all; while the other looks to increasing the proportion engaged in the work of production, and diminishing that engaged in trade and transportation, with increased return to all, giving to the labourer good wages, and to the owner of capital good profits. One looks to increasing the quantity of raw materials to be exported, and diminishing the inducements to the import of men, thus impoverishing both farmer and planter by throwing on them the burden of freight; while the other looks to increasing the import of men, and diminishing the export of raw materials, thereby enriching both planter and farmer by relieving them from the payment of freight. One looks to compelling the farmers and planters of the Union to continue their contributions for the support of the fleets and armies, the paupers, the nobles and the sovereigns of Europe; the other to enabling ourselves to apply the same means to the moral and intellectual improvement of the sovereigns of America. One looks to the continuance of that bastard freedom of trade which denies the principle of protection, yet doles it out as revenue duties; the other to extending the area of legitimate free trade by the establishment of perfect protection, followed by the annexation of individuals and communities, and ultimately by the abolition of custom-houses. One looks to exporting men to occupy desert tracts, the sovereignty of which is obtained by aid of diplomacy or war; the other to increasing the value of an immense extent of vacant land by importing men by millions for their occupation. One looks to increasing the necessity for commerce; the other to increasing the power to maintain it. One looks to underworking the Hindoo, and sinking the rest of the world to his level; the other to raising the standard of man throughout the world to our level. One looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other in increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization. One looks towards universal war; the other towards universal peace. One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.

"Such is the true mission of the people of these United States.... To raise the value of labour throughout the world, we need only to raise the value of our own.... To improve the political condition of man throughout the world, it is that we ourselves should remain at peace, avoid taxation for maintenance of fleets and armies, and become rich and prosperous.... To diffuse intelligence and to promote the cause of morality throughout the world, we are required only to pursue the course that shall diffuse education throughout our own land, and shall enable every man more readily to acquire property, and with it respect for the rights of property. To substitute true Christianity for the detestable system known as the Malthusian, it is needed that we prove to the world that it is population that makes the food come from the rich soils, and food tends to increase more rapidly than population, thus vindicating the policy of God to man."