In 1999, Chinese President Jiang Zemin and Premier Zhu Rongji had to fight China’s internal protectionism to enter WTO. Zhu Rongii even said he is so determined that he has prepared 100 coffins including one for himself. Today is 180 degrees in reverse, China continues to support opening up of China, but US has becoming the champion of protectionism. What a shame! 1999年，中國國家主席江澤民和國務院總理朱鎔基必須克服中國國內的保護主義才能加入世貿組織。朱鎔基甚至表示，他決心為死者準備100口棺材，其中一口要留給自己。如今卻180度大逆轉，中國繼續支持中國的開放，而美國卻成為保護主義的捍衛者。美國今天以經對自己缺乏信心，真丟臉，美國快玩完!

Did protectionism in 1920s partially responsible for the 1929 economic crashes? Will Donald Trump protectionism caused another world economic meltdown? By DeepSeek 1920 年代 1920 年代的保护主义是否应为 1929 年的经济崩溃负部分责任？唐纳德川普的保护主义会导致另一次世界经济崩溃吗？作者：DeepSeek March 31 2025

The role of protectionism in the 1920s and its connection to the 1929 crash, as well as the potential impact of Donald Trump’s protectionist policies, can be analyzed as follows:

1920s Protectionism and the 1929 Crash

1. Context and Policies:

• The 1920s saw the U.S. enact protectionist measures like the Fordney-McCumber Tariff (1922), which raised import duties. The more severe Smoot-Hawley Tariff (1930) followed the 1929 crash, exacerbating the Great Depression but not directly causing the crash itself.

1. Impact on the 1929 Crash:

• The immediate cause of the 1929 crash was speculative excess, margin buying, and financial panic, not protectionism. However, pre-crash protectionism weakened international trade relations and contributed to global economic fragility.
• Retaliatory tariffs and reduced trade likely worsened the post-crash downturn by stifling global demand and complicating debt repayments (e.g., European war debts to the U.S.), deepening the Depression.

1. Consensus View:

– Economists generally agree that 1920s protectionism was a secondary factor in the economic crisis, amplifying the Depression rather than triggering the initial crash.

Trump’s Protectionism and Modern Risks

1. Policies and Responses:

• Trump’s tariffs (e.g., on China, steel, aluminum) aimed to protect U.S. industries but sparked retaliatory measures (e.g., China’s tariffs on agricultural goods). These actions disrupted supply chains and increased costs for businesses and consumers.

1. Differences from the 1920s:

• Global Interconnectedness: Modern economies are more integrated, with institutions like the WTO and mechanisms for dispute resolution, which mitigate all-out trade wars.
• Economic Safeguards: Central banks and fiscal policies now have tools (e.g., quantitative easing, stimulus) to counteract downturns, unlike the 1930s.

1. Risks and Outcomes:

• While Trump’s tariffs did not cause a global meltdown, prolonged protectionism risks fragmenting trade networks, reducing efficiency, and slowing growth. A full-scale trade war could exacerbate recessions, particularly if combined with other shocks (e.g., pandemics, geopolitical conflicts).

– Current Consensus: Most economists view modern protectionism as increasing systemic risks but not inevitably leading to a meltdown, given today’s economic resilience and policy tools.

Conclusion

• 1920s Protectionism: Contributed to the severity of the Great Depression but was not the primary cause of the 1929 crash.
• Trump’s Policies: Increase economic vulnerabilities and trade tensions, but a global meltdown would require escalation beyond recent levels, coupled with inadequate policy responses. Vigilance is warranted, but outright catastrophe is not a foregone conclusion.

In short, while protectionism historically and today poses risks, context and modern safeguards play critical roles in determining outcomes.