Postindustrial Columnist Mark Yonkman explains why some rural Americans see tariffs as a long-term strategy to bolster national defense.
Why do farmers support tariffs while at the same time acknowledging that tariffs hurt farm income?
National defense.
In a recent survey, 70% of farmers think tariffs will help agriculture in the long term.
In that same survey, 56% of farmers believe tariffs will hurt farm income. This is consistent with the farmers I know.
Support for Chinese tariffs (though not tariffs on other countries) also remains high, despite the pain they cause.
Why the disconnect?
Because we no longer grow the food we need and don’t manufacture the goods we need to fight a war.
The vast majority of rural voters I know think we are already at war or soon will be.
A common conversation is the debate on when historians, in hindsight, will peg the beginning of World War III.
Was it when Trump was first elected? When Russia invaded Ukraine? Was it when Hamas attacked Israel?
The Atlantic Council’s 2025 Global Foresight Survey indicated that 40% of respondents believed that there would be another world war by 2035.
65% of respondents believed that China will attempt to retake Taiwan by force by 2035.
45% believe the U.S. and Russia will be in direct conflict by 2035.
And 47% believe the world will be divided into China-aligned and U.S.-aligned blocs by 2035.
The U.K. foreign secretary opined that “it is hard to think of a time when there has been so much danger, insecurity, and instability in the world. The lights are flashing red, as it were, on the global dashboard.”
The Guardian recently asked: “Are we heading for another world war – or has it already started?”
If voters think we will soon be at war with China, no cost is too great to wean ourselves off Chinese goods.
Economists ignore the fact that decisions based on national defense never make economic sense. From a purely economic view, we should have China make all of our fighter jets.
For many rural voters, it is not about bringing back jobs to the United States.
No one in my rural township wants a factory to open here.
When was the last time you heard someone say to their child that what they want for them when they grow up is a good-paying union job in a factory where you will have two bosses?
Never.
For the rural Michigan voter in particular, having a union boss in Flint or Detroit is simply a non-starter.
When Joe Biden talked about creating “good-paying union jobs,” he was selling a product no one wanted.
My two uncles, in their 90s, said it best. They think we need to move our manufacturing of essential materials out of China and into friendly countries like Mexico. We need to diversify our low-cost manufacturers and decouple from China.
Democrats want everything to be union-made and have made that a pillar of their platform, which means eliminating every mom & pop business and consolidating those businesses with large corporate enterprises, often owned by Trump supporters.
Indeed, in this last election cycle, Democratic candidates in Michigan were required to have their yard signs made in a union shop, even though a Democratic supporter did not own that shop.
And using the local mom & pop shop was forbidden.
Democrats refuse to acknowledge the possibility of war while Trump leans into it.
I hear rural voters state repeatedly that while they may not like President Trump’s approach, at least he understands the issue and has a plan. However, on the Democratic side, there is no plan.
When faced with choosing between a bad plan and no plan, voters choose a bad one.
At least a bad plan can improve while it is being implemented.
Some Democrats are now promoting Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as the next commander-in-chief. This is someone who is a vocal critic of defense spending and consistently advocates for significant cuts and a shift of spending toward domestic needs.
She has never addressed China’s threat, its leap in military materiel, America’s overdependence on China, America’s lack of icebreakers in the Arctic, or any other defense matter.
To the rural voter, there is no one less qualified to be commander-in-chief than AOC, given their belief in imminent war. Democrats do not recognize the harm done to their brand simply by presenting her as an option.
Democrats continue to be in denial that rural voters control perhaps 30% of the Electoral College vote – that portion that matters.
The Chinese, on the other hand, get it. Their first salvo of tariffs is always in the agricultural sector, and they understand where this key bloc lies.
There are Democrats who understand defense.
“[P]eople understand the importance of making microchips in America. They understand the importance of making our warships, submarines, and planes in America. They should understand that food is in that category. That without food, we’re nothing.”
That was Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin speaking to a group of 100 farmers earlier this year.
She went on to say that we should insist that our military bases feed our troops with food sourced from the U.S. If we can’t provide our troops with food during peacetime, how can we possibly expect to do so during wartime?
Her Republican leaning audience could not have been more pleased with her statements.
Democrats need to acknowledge the possibility of war.
Rural voters of all stripes get excited when I tell them that Mexico, the U.S., Canada, and Greenland must work closely together to form a unified North American defense bloc.
We shouldn’t bully our neighbors; we should work with them to form a defense team. We need to be ready when we find ourselves cut off from China.
Why don’t Democrats talk about this?
Because talk of the possibility of war is a bridge too far for most Democrats, as Sen. Slotkin recently pointed out, the Democratic Party is “Weak and Woke.”
In her words, Democrats need to muscle up and “fucking retake the flag.”
