Trump’s tariffs and Amazon’s rebellion

A battle for America’s economic soul?

This morning, in one of its first orders of business, the White House labelled Amazon’s decision to display the alleged costs of President Trump’s tariffs on its product pages a “hostile and political act.”

When the Cult of Free-Trade caught wind of the Trump Administration’s response, it commenced its bellowing, something that had been relatively silent as of late.

Critics dusted off the old saws:

“Tariffs are taxes on consumers!”
“Trade wars spell disaster!”
“Remember Smoot-Hawley!”

Nonsense.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 is the favorite cudgel of the free-trade evangelists. The analogy falters, however.

In the U. S. today, the economy roars at 3.5% growth, unemployment sits near historic lows, and wages continue to rise.

Trump’s tariffs are not acts of desperation but are calculated strikes in a war, prosecuted over more than four decades, to reclaim American sovereignty from the predation of the Beijing regime. The mercantilist onslaught by the Chinese—currency manipulation, forced technology transfers, state subsidies to undercut U. S. industries—demanded a response.

Trump chose confrontation over capitulation. For this, he deserves not scorn, but applause.

Amazon’s gambit, though, reveals a darker truth: The Titans of Tech and the Wall Street establishment would sooner bend a knee to Beijing than endure a skirmish for America’s own economic independence.

Furthermore, let us dispense with the fiction that Amazon is concerned about consumer “transparency.” This is a company that dodges taxes, crushes small businesses, and partners with the CCP to flood American markets with cheap goods. Its sudden urge to “inform” shoppers about the supposed costs of tariffs is a political broadside, plain and simple.

As Amazon weaponizes its platform, its motivation is to turn public opinion against Trump’s trade agenda. The message is clear: “The policies of your president are why your prices are rising.”

Never mind that China’s predatory practices have hollowed out American factories and decimated Midwestern towns. Never mind that those tariffs also forced Beijing to the bargaining table, extracting concessions on agricultural purchases and intellectual property theft.

For Amazon, short-term profit trumps any national interest.

The sharp rebuke from the White House was warranted. When corporate behemoths openly undermine U. S. trade policy, it is not mere dissent. It is economic sedition.

This year’s anemic “Prime Day” at Amazon, marked by sparse discounts and skittish sellers, lays bare the collateral damage of Trump’s trade war. Third-party vendors, reliant on Chinese manufacturing, now choke on tariffs as high as 145%. Some pulled out of the event entirely. Others slashed already thin margins to stay afloat.

Consider. Why are American businesses so dependent on Communist China? For decades, our political and corporate elites offshored industries, chasing cheap labor and lax regulations. They enriched shareholders while discarding American workers.

Now, as Trump dismantles this rotten paradigm, the same elites cry foul.

The struggles of Prime Day are not an indictment of tariffs, rather, an indictment of globalization. If supply chains snap because of a 2% tariff hike, was the system ever resilient enough to withstand from the outset? Or was globalization always a house of cards?

At approximately 9:00 am EDT this morning (April 29, 2025), Amazon announced its decision to display tariff costs on product listings. The White House quickly responded.

Upon this opening barrage, Amazon had to search for a neutral corner—looking to avoid the standing eight count.

Yet, as of 11:00 am, Amazon’s stock (AMZN) had dipped over 2%. This sent analysts into paroxysms. Came the wails, “Investors fear trade uncertainty!”

But is Wall Street’s anxiety not Main Street’s opportunity?

For every Amazon seller who groans because of the imposition tariffs may put on them, there is a manufacturer in Ohio re-opening his shuttered plant. For every Chinese-made toy that vanishes from the shelves of—virtual or brick & mortar—retailers, there is a Southern textile mill hiring once more.

Yes, prices may temporarily rise for consumers. But what is the cost of perpetual decline?

What is the cost to a nation that no longer makes anything of its own?

The stock market’s myopia is staggering. It rewards companies like Amazon for outsourcing jobs, shirking taxes, and exploiting trade imbalances.

Trump’s tariffs disrupt this perverse calculus, and for that he is branded a heretic by the globalist free traders.

Retail executives bray about “empty shelves” and warn about “hoarding” if Trump’s tariffs persist. The National Retail Federation forecasts a 20% decline. To which one may reply, “Good!”

American reliance on Chinese goods is a strategic vulnerability. In a crisis, Beijing can cripple U. S. supply chains, as it threatened to do during the confrontations over the Taiwan Strait.

Today, tariffs force diversification—to Viet Nam, India, Mexico, and, better yet, back to the United States.

Small businesses will face certain hardships, no doubt. But did we abandon the Civil Rights Act because compliance burdened some mom & pop stores? Did we discard child labor laws to protect corporate profits?

National priorities demand sacrifice. The path to economic sovereignty is not painless, but it is necessary.

Critics label Trump’s supposed trade war as “chaotic.” The reality? Trump is the first president to coherently challenge China’s global hegemony since Nixon opened relations in 1972.

Previous administrations, Republican and Democrat alike, kowtowed to Beijing by signing trade agreements that shipped American jobs overseas and transformed Red China into an industrial juggernaut.

Trump rejects this kind of defeatism. His tariffs are not about “protectionism,” as enemies of economic patriotism suggest. They are about reciprocity.

Why should American firms face a 25% tariff in China while Chinese companies enjoy 2.5% duties here? Is America in any way sensible when it continues to allow innovations of its own citizens and corporations to be pilfered by Beijing’s spies?

Fundamentally, Amazon’s rebellion underscores a cultural schism. Meanwhile, Trump has redefined what it means to be a Republican. He now stands as the champion of American workers, even if it means clashing with the corporate allies of the historic GOP—once widely accepted as “the party of business.”

The White House clash with the Bezosian empire now becomes a battle for the soul of the Republican Party—and the nation.

Reflect. Is the tariff fight about toaster ovens or TikTok videos?

Shall America remain a sovereign nation instead or become a full-fledged vassal state of global capital?

Amazon and its ilk would have us believe that patriotism is outdated, that borders are obstacles, and that the CCP is a benign trading partner. They would also be wrong.

Trump’s tariffs, like Reagan’s defense buildup, are an investment in national renewal. Short-term pain will give way to long-term gain as America, once more, sees factories humming, paychecks rising, and critical industries reshored.

The road ahead is rocky and Beijing will certainly retaliate. Corporations will resist. The corporate media will hyperventilate.

But, as Patrick J. Buchanan wrote in A Republic, Not an Empire, “A nation that will not endure hardship to preserve its independence has already lost it.”

A choice must be made: submission or sovereignty?

Trump chose. As did Amazon.

On which side will the American people come down?