Donald Trump may not be well-versed in the works of Michel Foucault, yet he exemplifies the philosopher’s assertion that “politics is the continuation of war by other means.” This is particularly evident in his inclination towards tariffs, which he promotes as a strategy to revitalize the American economy for blue-collar workers often overlooked by globalization and free trade. However, his perspective suggests that politics transcends truth or justice; it’s about power and dominance.
The UK is experiencing this dynamic firsthand, as Mr. Trump employs an “us-versus-them” narrative and a flair for the dramatic, positioning himself as an unwitting Foucauldian—using tariffs as instruments of loyalty and superiority, even against allies. Should Mr. Trump follow through on his threat to impose a 20% tariff on all imports, the UK economy will be adversely affected. The extent of the damage hinges on the response. If Britain refrains from retaliation, GDP could fall by 0.4% this year and 0.6% the next. A global trade conflict would escalate these figures to 0.6% and 1%, respectively, eliminating the government’s fiscal leeway. While UK policymakers grapple with tightening fiscal parameters, Mr. Trump seemingly disregards the need to disguise authority with objectivity.
The justification for his tariffs is ambiguous, yet two primary motivations emerge. First is his self-proclaimed persona as the ultimate negotiator, adept at turning situations to his favor. Second is his philosophy of politics as an avenue to structure society, favoring one group over another—not just financially but also in terms of legitimacy and the construction of reality. Tariffs may be rescinded if nations comply with Mr. Trump’s demands, thereby rewarding key political constituencies, tech allies, or his affluent supporters.
Evidence of this is apparent in a superficial UK–US “economic deal” that might lead to the removal of Trump’s tariffs—conditional on US approval. Reports indicate it would further liberalize British markets for US agribusiness, abolish the digital services tax affecting companies like Amazon and Google, and limit liability for AI firms owned by Mr. Trump’s associate Elon Musk. The risk lies in Mr. Trump’s propensity to threaten tariffs whenever grievances arise, only to propose lifting them if his conditions are met.
The situation is even clearer with the EU, which plans to penalize Apple and Meta under its digital competition laws. After initially supporting Mr. Trump, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg is now seeking a favor—urging the administration to incorporate his disputes with Brussels into the tariff strategies, framing regulation as yet another aspect of the trade conflict.
The magnitude of Mr. Trump’s “Liberation Day” is particularly alarming. In 2024, the US recorded a $1.2 trillion trade goods deficit. With only two months remaining until his potential return to the White House, Mr. Trump has enacted tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, China, as well as on all steel and aluminum products, and foreign vehicles and parts. Next, he targets allies in Asia, including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, and Vietnam.
What becomes evident is less a coherent trade policy and more a performance-based politics—where coercion, loyalty, and theatricality intersect. This is Foucault in practice: power wielded not through regulations but through disruption and negotiations that reward loyalty and penalize dissent. Like many others, Britain is maneuvering through a contentious landscape. Although the US president may not be a Foucault scholar, he evidently understands the principle: for him, war and politics are synonymous.
-
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
