Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences
Buy the Books
  • Macro Roundup
  • About Roundup
  • About Ed Conard
  • Highlights
  • Topics
  • Subscribe
Edward Conard
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • youtube

Do Isolationism, Nationalism & Ethnocentricity Turn People Against Trade? I’m Skeptical

In Sunday’s NYT, Greg Mankiw relies on a pair of studies by Ed Manfeild and Diana Mutz to suggest that blue collar workers support Trump’s anti-free trade economics because they are psychologically prone to isolationism, nationalism, and ethnocentricity, and further, that more education seems to soften people’s views on these issues. I remain skeptical.

The studies show that a person’s position on free trade is largely driven by their opinion about whether they believe free trade is good for the country and, to a lesser extent whether they believe it is best for themselves. While a person’s views on isolationism and ethnocentrism are one of the few statistically significant predicators of their position on trade, those indicators scarcely improve one’s ability to predict a person’s position on trade beyond knowing whether they believe trade is good for the country and/or themselves. The inability of these additional variable to add substantial predictive power despite their statistical significance suggests that a person’s positions on these issues may be correlated with one another rather than symptoms of deeper psychological drivers of anti-trade—intolerance or ignorance, for example.

Why might these positions be correlated with one another rather than causal? It would hardly be surprising if higher-skilled/higher-income workers were more open-minded about using tax revenues to intervene internationally or aid newly arriving immigrants, rather than feeling strongly about using them for the benefit of one narrow objective over another. On the other hand, those competing for the benefits of government spending—lesser-skilled workers and retirees, for example—may feel more strongly about the validity off their self interest and be more prone to hostility toward interests competing against them for a limited amount of government spending (or government restrictions that slow growth for the benefit of one special interest group at the expense of others). One need only look to sports to see similar psychological effects.

That’s not to say political beliefs are solely motivated by self interest. But is it any surprise that that white college grads skew Republican‎ or that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to support an increased minimum wage and that both are more prone to believing their position is better for America too?

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
© Copyright 2026 Coherent Research Institute · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Terms