There is a correlation between domestic abuse dynamics and Donald Trump’s use of tariffs as a geopolitical strategy.
While the contexts are vastly different—one is interpersonal and the other is international trade—the underlying psychological and power dynamics share some similarities, particularly in the use of uncertainty, coercion, and the promise of better outcomes contingent on compliance.
Here’s an analysis of the parallels.
1. Uncertainty as a Tool of Control
Domestic Abuse Context:
- Abusers often create an environment of unpredictability to keep their victims off-balance.
- Uncertainty can result in erratic behaviour, mixed messages, or sudden changes in rules or expectations.
- The victim may feel compelled to comply in hopes of avoiding further harm or achieving a promised better outcome.
Tariffs Context:
- Trump’s imposition of tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China introduced significant economic uncertainty.
- By threatening and implementing tariffs without clear long-term plans, he created a climate of unpredictability for businesses, governments, and markets.
- This uncertainty pressured the targeted countries to negotiate or comply with U.S. demands to avoid further economic disruption.
2. Coercion and Power Imbalance
Domestic Abuse Context:
- Abusers often exploit power imbalances to control their victims.
- Means of control can involve financial control, emotional manipulation, or physical intimidation.
- An abuser’s primary goal is to establish dominance and force compliance.
Tariffs Context:
- The U.S., as the world’s largest economy, holds significant leverage over smaller economies.
- By imposing tariffs, Trump used economic coercion to pressure Canada, Mexico, and China into renegotiating trade agreements (e.g., NAFTA to USMCA) or making concessions.
- The threat of economic harm (higher tariffs) served as a tool to assert dominance and force compliance.
3. Conditional Promises of Better Outcomes
Domestic Abuse Context:
- Abusers often dangle the promise of a better future (“things will get better if you just do what I say”) to keep their victims invested in the relationship.
- The promise of a distant better future creates a cycle of hope and compliance, even as the abuse continues.
Tariffs Context:
- Trump framed the tariffs as a temporary measure to achieve “better deals” for the U.S.
- For Americans, Trump maintains that the short-term pain of tariffs would lead to long-term gains, such as fairer trade terms, job creation, and economic growth.
- This narrative encouraged compliance and negotiation from targeted countries, even as they faced immediate economic strain.
4. Isolation and Dependence
Domestic Abuse Context:
- Abusers often isolate their victims from external support systems (e.g., friends, family, or resources) to increase dependence and control.
Tariffs Context:
- While not a perfect parallel, the tariffs created economic strain that could isolate targeted countries from global trade networks. For example, China faced pressure to reduce its reliance on U.S. markets, while Canada and Mexico were pushed to renegotiate trade terms that increased their economic dependence on the U.S.
5. Retaliation and Escalation
Domestic Abuse Context:
- Victims who resist or retaliate against abuse often face escalation, such as increased violence or manipulation.
- This reinforces the abuser’s control.
Tariffs Context:
- When targeted countries retaliated with their own tariffs (e.g., China’s tariffs on U.S. agricultural products), the U.S. responded with further escalation (e.g., higher tariffs or additional trade restrictions).
- This created a cycle of economic conflict, mirroring the escalation seen in abusive relationships.
6. The Role of Bystanders
Domestic Abuse Context:
- Bystanders (e.g., friends, family, or institutions) can either enable or challenge abusive behaviour.
- Bystander inaction often perpetuates the cycle of abuse.
Tariffs Context:
- In the case of Trump’s tariffs, other countries and international organisations (e.g., WTO) acted as bystanders.
- Some criticised the tariffs as destabilising, while others sought to mediate or adapt to the new trade landscape.
- The lack of a unified, strong response from the global community allowed the U.S. to continue its coercive tactics.
Conclusion
While the contexts of domestic abuse and international trade are fundamentally different, the psychological and power dynamics at play share notable similarities.
Trump’s use of tariffs as a coercive tool—leveraging uncertainty, conditional promises, and economic power—mirrors the tactics used by abusers to control and manipulate their victims.
Both scenarios highlight the importance of recognising and addressing power imbalances, whether in personal relationships or global politics.