L'etat, c'est moi

 The United States constitution specifically allows for tariffs on imported good and commodities.It just as specifically assigns that power to the Congress of the United States, the United States Senate and the House or Representatives. These bodies have delegated certain economic powers to the executive branch, including the power to impose tariffs in circumstances where economic circumstances would affect American national security.

This weekend, President Trump announced his intention to increase tariffs on products imported from Canada by 10%. Canada has not done anything in the past four days to affect the strategic situation of the United States; we have committed no unfriendly acts, have not dropped the tariffs we agreed to impose on Chinese electrical vehicles, have, in fact, not done anything to affect the strategic or economic situation in the United States.

The Trump administration has at least stated their grievances honestly; they don't claim Canadians have done anything that would have a material effect on their economy. Their complaint arises solely from a series of advertisements the Ford government in Ontario has run. These ads correctly point out that the Trump policy of tariffs departs from the free trade policy advocated by Ronald Reagan, which gave rise to the so-called "Washington consensus" in favour of unrestricted trade and markets. 

In other words, Donald Trump has imposed a 10% additional tax on Americans who use or depend on Canadian steel or aluminum, as well as many other products and commodities, and he has done it because an advertisement from a Canadian provincial government has offended him personally. He has imposed a tax on Americans, and said clearly he has imposed a tax on Americans, out of personal pique. In other words, he has claimed a power without much in the way of precedent: to use the authority of the United States government against a foreign government that offends him personally. 

Yet another modest proposal

There is no such thing as he "war on the car". Whether we view cars as their physical reality, tin boxes with a wheel at each corner, or as concepts, or as cultural tropes, cars are not moral agents and do not have a right of self defence. If we as a society choose to limit or even eliminate the operation of private automobiles in our society, or particularly in our cities, we can do so. It requires no war and no conflict. We are not in a war; we are having a debate.