In the premiere episode of “Interesting Times,” columnist Ross Douthat sits down with Oren Cass, founder of the conservative think tank American Compass, to make the controversial case for tariffs—and why the economic shockwaves they’re causing might just be worth it. Amidst President Trump’s sweeping new tariff regime, which has rattled global markets and stirred recession fears, Cass argues that a little disruption today could lead to a more resilient and equitable American economy tomorrow. He compares the current boom to “bumps on a downward slope,” suggesting economic growth masks the long-term erosion of middle-class security. Cass defends tariffs not only as a tool to rebuild domestic manufacturing—and with it, good jobs for non-college-educated Americans—but also as a national security imperative to reduce reliance on China. While supportive of Trump’s broad goals, he strongly critiques the administration’s approach as overly chaotic and poorly communicated, warning that if this path fails, it could discredit reindustrialization efforts for a generation.

Key Points:

• Oren Cass supports a permanent 10% global tariff to encourage domestic manufacturing, curb trade deficits, and reduce reliance on China.
• He frames U.S. economic stagnation for working-class Americans as the result of decades-long deindustrialization accelerated by trade policies like NAFTA and China's WTO entry.
• Cass: “We’ve seen a very clear divergence in the fortunes of the typical worker... and the upper middle class, who has seen so much of the benefit.”
• He lauds manufacturing’s unique role in diversifying regional economies and providing stable, well-paying work for non-college-educated workers.
• Tariffs, Cass argues, are a more “free market” solution than industrial policy, changing trade incentives broadly without having to micromanage every sector.
• He acknowledges tariffs will cause short-term economic pain but says they’re a worthwhile sacrifice for long-term social and economic stability.
• Cass supports industrial policy as a complement to tariffs—especially for critical sectors like semiconductors—but insists the entire industrial ecosystem matters, not just high-tech niches.
• He critiques the Trump administration for launching the tariffs too quickly without clear phase-in periods or long-term clarity, which risks damaging investment confidence.
• Cass cautions against erratic, unpredictable trade policy: “The very real cost is actual harm to real people if you load up costs that aren’t going to produce benefits.”
• He also warns that if the policy crashes and burns under Trump, it could discredit the movement to rebuild American industry and strengthen economic nationalism for a generation.

Recommended References:

• For those interested in Cass’s work, check out the American Compass “Cost of Thriving Index” and their industrial policy white papers.
• Supporters of targeted industrial policy over broad tariffs might prefer the Biden-era CHIPS and Science Act or Ro Khanna’s proposed manufacturing legislation.

Fact-check note: Overall, Cass’s arguments reflect a widely recognized critique of globalization’s impact on U.S. workers. Academic studies (like David Autor’s work on the “China shock”) support portions of his analysis. However, most mainstream economists argue tariffs usually reduce overall economic output and disproportionately hurt consumers—making the Cass argument controversial among experts. Nonetheless, the risks of overdependence on China and the value of industrial diversification are gaining bipartisan traction.
Link to Article