It’s time to boycott American goods and services. Buy British. Buy European. Buy Chinese. Buy anything except American.
Non-Americans hit by Trumpian tariffs cannot influence American politics through the ballot box. But they can vote with their pocket books. And a point-blank refusal to buy American products would have more of an impact than retaliatory tariffs that make those products more expensive.
Individuals are already turning their backs on American merchandise. Last month Europeans registered their displeasure with Donald Trump and his billionaire backer Elon Musk by cutting Tesla sales by 50 percent. Others have shown their disapproval by refusing to buy Coca-Cola or taking their coffee breaks at Café Nero instead of Starbucks.
But these are haphazard kneejerk boycotts which may give the individual a momentary self-righteous glow. They will have little if any effect on the Washington policymakers. What is needed is a coordinated effort that organises pickets, produces literature and stuffs it through letter products. A well-oiled machine with foot soldiers, a PR team and a website that identifies products and services to boycott and names non-American alternatives and goes on to monitor success.
A boycott would also help the re-ordering of trade patterns away from the United States. If people are not buying American goods than they are buying goods from other countries. The businesses in those countries will quickly realise the opportunity and divert their supply lines accordingly
The government can’t do the job of organising a boycott. Not because it is incapable of the task but because it would be politically irresponsible. A successful government-organised boycott would almost certainly result in retribution from the ever-mercurial Trump. It would be in character for Trump to retaliate with restrictions in vital areas such as intelligence gathering or weapons procurement.
No, what is needed is an existing political machine that has significant representation in parliament but is separate from the government. There is no time to re-invent the wheel. The public requires an existing political party whose leader has already firmly staked out a firm anti-Trumpian position and called for a coordinated response to tariffs and other unacceptable behaviour by the current tenant of the White House.
What is needed is for Britain’s Liberal Democrats—led by Sir Ed Davey—to organise a proper boycott of American products. The government can’t do it. The Tories won’t do it. That leaves the Liberal Democrats – with a leader committed to doing something—with the opportunity and the responsibility.
There are roughly 100,000 Liberal Democrats in the UK. In addition 3,519,199 people voted for the Lib Dems in the last election and put a post-war record of 72 MPs in the House of Commons. The 100,000 joined a political party because they want to influence policy. The vast majority of Lib Dems—if not all of them—see the American president as a major threat to democracy, liberal values, British national interests and global peace and prosperity.
They would jump at the opportunity to be exploited in a way that politically damaged Donald Trump. A well-organised and well-publicised boycott across the UK would do just that.
Better still a global boycott. Based in the National Liberal Club at 1 Whitehall Place is Liberal International. It has affiliated parties in 100 countries. Those countries constitute a third of the world’s population. It is no exaggeration to say that Trump’s tariffs, cuts in aid and other policies are threatening every person in those countries.
Britain’s Liberal Democrats are well-placed to take the leading role not just in Britain but across the world. The UK is recognised by other countries as having a special relationship with the US. If one of its major political parties organises an effective boycott of American goods than other countries are more likely to follow.
Finally, it should be made clear that the boycott is not against the American people. It is against the dangerous policies of its government. To be more specific, one man’s policies—Donald Trump.
* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and author of “The Encyclopaedia of the Cold War” and “America Made in Britain".
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Labour MPs revolt
Edward Street of old #dundeewestend
Tens of Thousands
A Puffin Books profile of Joan Aiken
"Could you be the one to help a care leaver?"
Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls
Steve Trevethan
Peter Martin
nigel hunter
Craig Levene
30 Comments
No, no, no. I can’t believe how illiberal the Lib Dems are. Seriously, what is the point of the Lib Dems? What do they actually stand for? This article is what I would expect from the harder left, not a Lib Dem. I voted Lib Dem at the last GE after voting Tory in the past. But I think I might have to vote Labour next time because they are the most sensible/ genuinely liberal in their approach. Tariffs are bad. Boycotts are bad. We should be sensible in our relationship with Trump and wait for him to be gone, minimising interruptions to trade. If we get higher tariffs on us now it will be difficult for a future administration to cut those tariffs. I get why someone on the left supports boycotts and fighting back tit for tat but this isn’t liberalism in the British tradition, so I don’t see why the Lib Dems should be backing that kind of behaviour?
I’m sorry to say this because I normally agree with Tom Arms, but I’m afraid this article is negative stuff which simply adds fuel to Putin’s fire. It is certainly not liberalism, either classical or social, but simple tit for tat. Lib Dems should be better than that.
Somehow we’ve got to get through the next four years until the American people are rid of Trump and all his acolytes…. which they undoubtedly will do.
What we should do is to work with our European allies and the Commonwealth countries on closer economic ties. What I really fear is a Chinese attempt on Taiwan or some stupid Trumpian blundering in Greenland which will provoke Putin.
Wait for him to begone.How long will that take? Is he allowed to destroy world stability first? No!. Something has to be done.I agree with the govnt taking it softly but Trump,the bully,has to be checked. The LIBDEM’s can ‘SUGGEST’ THE POSSIBILITY of boycotting US goods but leave it to INDIVIDIUALS and other organisations to consider boycotts. Why? That way we show our displeasure with TRUMP’s policies but when we are then in a position of REAL responsibility we can act in a mature responsible way.
An individual decision to boycott a product or service – for whatever reason – is the ultimate expression of liberalism. It involves exercising the right to choose that is inherent in a free market system. Most people make consumer choices based on price and quality but is it perfectly legitimate to do so on the basis of one’s political principles. In the past I boycotted BA and Marks and Spencer because they contributed to the Tories. Nowadays, I would never use a Wedderspoons or buy a Dyson product because their owners actively supported Brexit.
In the same vein, a decision to boycott a country is not illiberal if you disapprove of what its government is doing. And in a democracy, you have the right to try to persuade others to do the same.
Trump is using classic divide and rule tactics and our government is falling into the trap. The Labour government’s “softly softly” approach may limit the short-term economic pain for people in Britain but appeasing a bully to avoid getting beaten up rarely ends well. How can Keir Starmer put any faith in a special deal with the USA when Trump has just torn up the “great deal” he negotiated with Canada and Mexico just six years ago?
In spite of its current leader, the USA is still a friendly country and the one that will be hit hardest by these tarrifs. Rather than retaliating against Trump by punching ourselves in the face, we should be looking to build alternative trading relationships as wide and deep as possible. On an individual level, by all means boycott those responsible. I’m almost tempted to get a driving licence so I can not buy a Tesla. Instead, I shall be actively looking for Falkland Islands MSC toothfish.
The EU has had Common Customs Tariffs for 57 years. This bellicosing we hear of counter measures is pointless . Where do you start – Amazon , Netflix , Face book etc – or American food brands – Kellogs ! …I’ve just placed an online order with the American food company in London. Looking forward to some real candy this week.
The Tariffs announced by the USA appear to be a mix of tax raising initiatives and opening salvos in expected trade negotiations by the Trump administration.
The 10% worldwide tariff is not much more than might have been expected has the US opted to introduce a federal VAT or Canada style Goods and services tax. Unlike VAT in the UK, the 10% tariff catches imported foodstuffs. energy and other goods that are often exempted or zero-rated. This makes the tariff a highly regressive tax for American consumers.
Both the UK and EU have sought to protect strategic domestic industries including steel, aluminum and autos through the use of quotas and tariffs.
President Biden blocked Japanese steelmaker Nippon Steel Corporation (NSC), the world’s third-largest steel producer, acquisition of United Steel Biden Blocks $15B Japan Takeover of US Steel, Cites Security Risk and Trump upheld the block when he came into office.
While Canada and Mexico in particular have real grievances in respect of the flouting of existing free trade agreements and both China and the EU are expected to retaliate, other smaller markets like the UK will need to pursue trade negotiations for the sectors that are of principal concern such as UK luxury cars sold into the US market.
Johnny Walker 12 year old black label retails for about £36 ($47) in the UK inclusive of taxes and about $40 in the USA. A 10% tariff pushes that up to $44/$45. It is not good news for the Scotch Whiskey sector, but India is the number one export market (by volume if not by value) with France in 2nd and USA in 3rd.
I think there is a case for choosing not to buy US goods.
I disagree quite strongly with the populist “Buy British” line the party has taken. It seems nationalistic, populist and anti free trade.
@ jobourke, great comment Joe. This should be the Ine the party is taking. Our exports to USA seem to be mainly luxury end goods and as such have the benefit in the USA market of inelastic demand. If Mark Carney calls for a world conference we should be applauding this
The commons custom tariff has been with the EU since it’s inception. All this bellicosing nonsense about retaliatory tariffs – where do you start. Netflix , Amazon, Facebook or brands like Kellogs etc . I’ve just placed an online order from the American shop in London and I’ll be enjoying some real candy this week ..
Might a country which delivers “one man’s policies”, be acting as a dictatorship rather than a democracy?
What might be the differences and similarities, in this case, between boycotts and self-defence measures?
As these tariffs will hit the poorest countries hardest, might (social) liberals have a duty to work against them A S A P?
Might it be that Mr Trump is already planning for a third term in office?
If people wish to retaliate against the USA that is their choice. However, they need to consider that every time they use a card to make payments (even if the goods or services they are purchasing are not American) then this still results in money going to the USA since both Mastercard and Visa are American companies. Why can’t we have the choice of a British (or European) alternative to these card companies?
Very few people outside of Trump’s immediate circle support these tariffs, but the entire world is stuck dealing with them – and will, to varying degrees, suffer because of them. As an American living in Britain, I support the idea of sending a message to the American government – not the American people – that these tariffs are harming everyone, including Americans. And, that we will do whatever we can to oppose them.
Of course, what we can do is limited. But choosing not to buy American goods – and choosing alternatives from elsewhere – gives a bit of agency to people who otherwise don’t have much. The author didn’t say “Buy British”; he said “Don’t Buy American.” That’s a big difference.
We’ve always known how large and influential the US market is – but what Trump has done is underline just how dependent the rest of the world is on it. He’s made that imbalance impossible to ignore. But maybe that’s also the motivation we need to start shifting things – to look at how we can support each other more and rely a little less on the whims of one country’s leadership. I know that’s a long road, and it won’t happen overnight. But if choosing not to buy a Coca-Cola gives someone the feeling that they can take a stand, even in a small way, then I think that matters. And I’m all for it.
In the 1980s, NatWest (National Westminster Bank) offered credit cards primarily under the Access card brand, which was a major UK credit card scheme at the time.
The Access card was launched in 1972 by a consortium of British banks (including NatWest, Midland Bank (HSBC), Lloyds Bank, and Royal Bank of Scotland) as a competitor to Barclaycard.
The Access card was part of the MasterCard network (via the Master Charge scheme), so it was accepted internationally where MasterCard was recognized.
Access began to decline in the 1990s, and eventually the brand was phased out in 1996 when many banks switched to issuing MasterCard or Visa branded cards directly.
As the tariffs are predicted to hit poorest countries hardest, might it be a [social] liberal concern to get them reduced to removed A. S. A. P.?
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/article/2025/04/05/poor-countries-are-victims-of-trump-s-cynicism_6739870_23.html
Lots of good comments to respond to, so here goes:
@Kyle– Obviously we disagree. I should add that I am a strong proponent of the long-standing policy of free trade. Unfortunately, Donald Trump is not, and as Nigel said, we can’t afford to wait nearly four years for him to leave office, and you have to accept that there is a very real possibility that Trump may be followed by JD Vance, or even find a way to be elected to athird term.
@Peter Davies– Absolutely we should be looking for alternatives, preferably joining the EU Customs Union. We could also link up with Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and South Africa, all of whom have been hit harder than ourselves. But that should be done along with a boycott because Donald Trump should be made aware of our displeasure and because a boycott of US goods would help in establishing alternative trading patterns.
“An individual decision to boycott a product or service – for whatever reason – is the ultimate expression of liberalism”
Indeed. Some here will be old enough to remember the boycotts of South Africa – a factor in the eventual ending of apartheid there.
@Kyle Harrison
How far would you go in your opposition to boycotting something/someone?
Canada has developed a strong grassroots culture of boycotting American goods in the last few months. Incidentally it has forced them to rethink the internal barriers to trade between provinces.
I remember the power of the boycott of South African goods during apartheid. It was not just the economic effect (I have no idea actually whether it did have a significant impact) but the strength of the message.
So yes I think we should try to avoid buying American products for the time being. Note I am NOT saying we should always buy British – it is important to keep healthy trading links with other countries. I’m not at all clear how to extract myself from American online services, but at least I can boycott goods. OK, so it is a gesture, but as we know from our own general election campaign, gestures do have an impact. And I think we should get behind a movement to popularise this.
American colonists did boycott British goods in 1774 after the Boston Tea Party. Trade between the colonies and Britain subsequently fell sharply. The British Parliament responded with economic sanctions. The outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in April 1775 superseded the need to boycott British goods.
The USA from its inception employed tariffs to protect its domestic industries from the trading might of the British empire throughout the 19th century. It was only at the turn of the 19th when Theodore Roosevelt assumed the presidency that the US felt strong enough to compete with Britain and embrace free trade.
The USA’s return to protectionism and Tariffs is a symptom of decline and the threat to the dominance of the US dollar arising from the rise of China and the Brics counties.
Britain established the sterling area in 1931 after leaving the gold standard. “The decline of the Sterling Area was related to the decline of the British pound as a reserve currency. In 1950, more than 55% of the world’s reserves were in sterling. In 2011, the proportion was about 2%.”
As the dollar declines in importance as a reserve currency and America becomes a less attractive destination for global investors, the ability of the USA to finance large trade deficits with the rest of the world at acceptable levels of interest will decline.
So, boycotting US products is somehow illiberal? Yet we are sanctioning Russia and in effect boycotting its goods. We are dealing with Russia in this way because of an illegal invasion (or war). Trump has declared a trade war on the rest of the world and somehow we shouldn’t respond by sanctions and boycotts.
I have argued on another thread that we should now seek to end our dependency on the USA for both products/services and defence and seek to trade elsewhere and seek to link up with others for mutual protection. Even if the Republicans are thrown out in 2028, the rest of the world cannot afford to be put in this position again by the USA.
I don’t know what to mkae of this as I’m not an economist but it would feel good to do something. I don’t see why it’s not liberal. Didn’t a boycott help end apartheid?
Just remember that the Donald is a tiny blip in USA history and whilst we need to mitigate his disastrous policies we need to remain friends with the people of America.
A further thought on tariffs and boycotts. A retaliatory tariff on US products would be paid ultimately by British consumers who bought American goods, Thus it would fuel inflation which is bad. A boycott would not affect the prices of imported American products, if anything it would drive down those prices as the vendors of the American products try to break the boycott with lower prices.
I am slightly surprised at the antipathy towards any notion of a “buy British” campaign.
Whilst we may be internationalists, ultimately our electorate are overwhelmingly British Citizens and we are elected to represent British interests and British workers. Not the rest of the world’s interests or workers.
Ultimately if there is a conflict between internationalism and Britain’s interest then British interests must prevail. Otherwise you end up with a policy of “the EU says Jump, we ask how high?!”
We should never be the people described in Orwell’s essay “England, your England”.
The relevant quote from “England your England” is:
“In intention, at any rate, the English intelligentsia are Europeanized. They take their cookery from Paris and their opinions from Moscow. In the general patriotism of the country they form a sort of island of dissident thought. England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during ‘God Save the King’ than of stealing from a poor box.”
If there is to be a trade war, it will be between the US and China. The UK and USA are too closely tied economically, culturally and miltarily to engage in a trade war. The EU is designed as a protectionist bloc and will seek to negotiate mutually acceptable terms with the US, as it has done with many countries.
Canada is a special case, but if Mark Carney is elected and continues as PM, I fully expect he, together with the US business community and congress, will be able to bring sufficient pressure on Trump to reinstate much of the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement and relax tariffs on cross-border supply chain movements.
The US-China trade war is the most concerning to the global economy. China’s experience of trade wars with Britain in the Opium wars of the 19th century and the century of humilation that followed when China was diplomatically and militarily dominated by Western colonial powers looms large in China’s historical memory and will not be repeated.
America is split between half of the population that has benefitted from globalisation and half that has been left behind by automation and deindustralisation. Britain has the same problem. Protectionism or trade boycotts are not the answer. LibDems should be making the case for addessing income and wealth inequality with radical tax reform and strategic investment both here in the UK and with progressives in the US democrat party.
@JoeBurke. Sorry Joe, ypou’ve got it wrong. We are not closely tied with the USA anymore and, frankly key, should take this opportunity to greatly reduce our dependence on trade and defence with the USA. There are huge emerging markets, the EU is on our doorstep. It already accounts for 40% of our trade and if we can only reengage with the EU and join the customs union, then the single market and then rejoin the EU our economy will be secure and no longer subject to the whims of US presidents or the US Congress. We should seek afresh links with our friends in Canada and the rest of the commonwealth. To continue the charade that somehow we have a special relationship with the USA, when clearly we don’t and won’t have for the foreseeable future, is the politics of stupidity.
Our role as Liberals must be to offer a different way; not the current go for growth grab it all system; instead an economics in which people count, not the grasping billionaires; a country which is generous both at home and abroad, not one where self rightious demagogues seek to divide,
Mick,
reducing commercial dependence on ties with the USA is easier said then done. It is not simply a matter of imports and exports. Virtually all British multi-nationals have significant dollar business in the UK. Many are listed on US stock markets British Companies on The US Stock Market. These ties have been built up over centuries. This is why when the pound weakens against the dollar the share prices of top UK companies go up – because so much of their earnings are in US dollars.
Here in the UK, Angus Hanton’s recent book Vassal State: How America Runs Britain is described as:
“Vassal State lays bare the extent to which US corporations own and control Britain’s economy: how American business chiefs decide what we’re paid, what we buy, and how we buy it. US companies have carved up Britain between them, siphoning off enormous profits, buying up our most lucrative firms and assets, and extracting huge rents from UK PLC – all while paying little or no tax. Meanwhile, policymakers, from Whitehall mandarins to NHS chiefs, shape their decisions to suit the whims of our American corporate overlords.”
It is estimated that 2 million UK workers are employed in US owned firms.
@Slamdac: For me the potential problem of a ‘Buy British’ campaign is that it’s a zero-sum game. If people deliberately buy British then that hurts a foreign business to exactly the same extent as it benefits a British business. In fact it’s worse because if it means people are shunning the most competitive product, then we’re making ourselves worse off. And if every country responded by doing likewise, then everyone would be worse off (Although set against that, there might be some environmental gains from goods not travelling as far).
I have no problem with movements to avoid buying from a specific country where there are specific political aims (for example, not buying from Russia until they withdraw from Ukraine, or not buying from countries with awful human rights records) but trying to not buy from anyone outside your own country seems to me completely counter-productive, in terms of losing the benefits of international trade.
There are large anti-trump protests across the USA Anti-Trump protests held in cities across the US and the anti-Elon Musk Tesla boycott seems to be pretty much worldwide.