Muslim World Report

The Countdown to Crisis: Can Western Capitalism Survive Tariffs?

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 5, 2025 10:16 AM | 10 min read | 1984 words

The Countdown to Crisis: Can Western Capitalism Survive Tariffs?

TL;DR

As geopolitical tensions rise and tariffs escalate, Western capitalism faces an uncertain future. The implications for the global economy could be dire, as the decline of the U.S. dollar and the emergence of new economic blocs reshape the landscape. Strategic actions by governments and emerging economies are crucial to navigate these challenges.

The Situation

The global economic landscape is undergoing profound transformation, signifying the potential decline of Western capitalism—a reality underscored by geopolitical upheaval and economic shifts that have intensified in recent years. Key influences include:

  • The ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
  • The Gaza crisis.

These conflicts have laid bare the vulnerabilities of a global order that has long been dominated by Western powers, particularly the United States (Feygina et al., 2009; Giuliannotti, 2002). These geopolitical tensions not only strain international relationships but also expose the diminishing influence of the U.S. as a stabilizing force in a world increasingly polarized by conflicting interests.

In response to these pressures, nations such as China, South Korea, and Japan have solidified closer economic ties as a countermeasure to the tariffs and isolationist policies imposed by the previous U.S. administration (Prasad & Ye, 2012). Concurrently, African nations like Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso are vocal in their efforts to dismantle the vestiges of colonial influence—signaling a collective resistance against the historical hegemony of Western powers (Arrighi & Silver, 2001; Karimi, 2008).

Forecasts and Implications

Forecasts suggest a gradual decline of Western capitalism rather than a sudden collapse. This decline may have severe implications for the U.S. economy, including:

  • The potential demotion of the U.S. dollar from its status as the world’s reserve currency.
  • A cascade of crises impacting global trade and cooperation (Kirshner, 2008; Paul, 2005).

As costs of living soar and the middle class erodes, Americans are confronted with urgent questions regarding the long-term viability of a system traditionally perceived as invulnerable (Mayer & Dahrendorf, 1960). A sustained economic downturn may provoke domestic unrest as citizens grapple with the consequences of a system increasingly scrutinized (Mudge, 2008).

The repercussions of ongoing U.S. military engagements abroad could further exacerbate these economic vulnerabilities. The rise of alternative economic blocs, such as BRICS, signifies a collective shift away from the Western capitalist paradigm, indicating that the foundations of this system are growing increasingly fragile (Sahlins, 1999; Tan, 1998).

What If Scenarios

What If the U.S. Dollar Loses Its Reserve Status?

The potential loss of the U.S. dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency would represent a watershed moment in global economic dynamics. Historically, countries have maintained U.S. dollar reserves, facilitating American trade deficits with minimal immediate consequences. However, if nations such as China and Russia champion alternative currencies—possibly including cryptocurrencies—the demand for the dollar may significantly decline (Tan, 1998; Taskinsoy, 2019).

A sudden drop in dollar demand could precipitate rapid depreciation, destabilizing the U.S. economy while fueling inflationary pressures that would disproportionately impact American consumers. Consequences include:

  • Escalating costs for imported goods.
  • Struggles for the federal government to manage its mounting debt.

This situation could devolve into a vicious cycle: as the dollar declines, economic instability would rise, prompting social unrest and potentially authoritarian governmental responses to quell dissent (Miller, 1977; Ruggie, 1982). Deteriorating international relations would follow, as allied nations reassess their economic dependencies on the U.S., viewing it less as a stabilizing force and more as a liability in their own economic strategies (Sutcliffe, 2004).

What If Military Engagements Escalate?

Should the U.S. engage in more impulsive military actions in response to perceived threats, the ramifications could include:

  • Increased military expenditures diverting essential resources away from domestic social programs, exacerbating issues of poverty and inequality at home (Paul, 2005).
  • Uniting adversaries and prompting strategic alliances contrary to U.S. interests (Weiss et al., 2022).

As nations such as Iran and North Korea take provocative actions, the fallout could lead to regional crises, straining U.S. resources further and demanding humanitarian interventions that may not be sustainable. Domestic backlash against military failures could ignite public outcry, challenging governmental legitimacy and heralding calls for systemic change (Myles & Quadagno, 2002; Jost, 2009).

The compounding effects of military escalation and a declining dollar could foster a climate of uncertainty. Rising costs and military overreach may cultivate an environment ripe for extremist ideologies or movements, further polarizing an already fragmented society.

What If Global Cooperation on Climate Change Fails?

The specter of climate change presents an existential threat that transcends national borders; however, the failure of global cooperation in this critical realm could hasten the decline of Western capitalism. Key considerations include:

  • Increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events amplifying costs associated with climate mitigation and adaptation.
  • Resistance to meaningful climate agreements leading to coalitions that intentionally exclude American interests (Barrett, 2003; Alston, 2015).

The U.S. economy could suffer significant setbacks with industries reliant on fossil fuels falling behind more progressive nations committed to sustainable development (Falkner, 2016). The failure to adequately address the climate crisis could trigger domestic social unrest as citizens become increasingly aware of the economic and human costs of inaction. The rise of governance models focused on equity and environmental justice may challenge traditional narratives supporting Western capitalism (Karimi, 2008; Wijen & Ansari, 2007).

An Integrated Analysis of ‘What If’ Scenarios

Considering the intersections of these hypothetical scenarios reveals a complex web of implications that could further entrench the decline of Western capitalism. If the U.S. dollar’s reserve status were to be lost, this economic destabilization could reduce resources available for military expenditures. Consequently, reduced funding could exacerbate military engagements, further increasing domestic tensions as social programs suffer and public dissatisfaction grows. This could elevate the risk of social unrest and political instability, complicating the U.S. position in the global economic order.

Simultaneously, the failure of climate cooperation could lead to economic isolation. The U.S. might find itself increasingly sidelined as nations unite around sustainable practices while the American economy grapples with its own resistance to change. Citizens will become more aware of the environmental and economic ramifications of this inaction, leading to internal dissent. The intersection of these scenarios illustrates a precarious future where not only is the global economy affected, but social fabrics fray as citizens react to governmental inadequacies in addressing pressing crises.

Strategic Maneuvers

For the U.S. Government

To avert the looming decline of Western capitalism, the U.S. government must critically reassess its foreign and domestic strategies. Key actions include:

  • A renewed emphasis on multilateralism.
  • Rebuilding ties with traditional allies while constructively engaging with emerging economies.

This approach may necessitate concessions on trade policies and tariffs that have alienated vital partners (Prasad & Ye, 2012). By fostering cooperative economic relationships, the U.S. could regain some influence and stabilize its economic standing as the landscape shifts.

Investing in infrastructure and shifting toward a green economy can serve dual purposes: addressing economic risks while mitigating climate change impacts. By fostering innovation and job creation in renewable energy sectors, the government could rejuvenate economic growth and reestablish credibility on the global stage (Mudge, 2008; Chaffin et al., 2016). Such initiatives would also demonstrate a commitment to combating climate change—an increasingly crucial point of contention among global powers.

For Emerging Economies

Emerging economies asserting their independence must remain vigilant and cohesive. They should continue to strengthen ties within coalitions such as BRICS, leveraging collective bargaining power to forge a more equitable global economic order. This unity will be crucial as nations navigate decreasing reliance on Western markets while shifting toward sustainable development aligned with long-term environmental goals (Arrighi & Silver, 2001; Feng et al., 2023).

Furthermore, actively engaging with civil society and grassroots movements is vital to ensuring local populations feel included in economic progress. This connection can mitigate internal dissent and bolster governmental legitimacy, fostering a sense of shared responsibility for developments in both economic and social realms (Karimi, 2008).

For Global Civil Society

Global civil society organizations will play a pivotal role in shaping discussions and policies surrounding economic systems in the face of impending crises. Their efforts should focus on:

  • Amplifying voices advocating for a reimagined global economic order that values equity, sustainability, and cooperation.
  • Fostering transnational networks to hold governments accountable, ensuring that economic policies reflect public needs rather than entrenched interests (Mudge, 2008; Inge et al., 2021).

Advocating for systemic reforms within institutions like the IMF and World Bank is essential, emphasizing social welfare over austerity measures aimed at building a more just global economic system (Prasad & Ye, 2012; Baron, 2022). Increasing pressure from global civil society could catalyze necessary changes in policy direction, fostering a sense of urgency around the necessity for equity in economic practices.

Conclusion

The impending decline of Western capitalism ultimately encapsulates both risks and opportunities within a dynamically changing global environment. Addressing these challenges through strategic maneuvers will be critical for nations to work collaboratively toward a more equitable world. The unfolding narrative will hinge not only on economic stability but also on humanity’s capacity for solidarity in the face of shared, imminent crises. The gradual unraveling of Western capitalism may not manifest as an abrupt collapse, but rather as a slow decline that underscores the profound necessity for immediate and coordinated action across the globe.

References:

  • Arrighi, G., & Silver, B. J. (2001). Chaos and Governance in the Modern World System. University of Minnesota Press.
  • Alston, P. (2015). The Quiet Revolution: Accountability and the Market Economy. Cambridge University Press.
  • Barrett, S. (2003). Environmental and Trade Policies in the Context of Globalization. World Bank.
  • Baron, A. (2022). Reforming the IMF: A Call for Change. Journal of Global Policy.
  • Chaffin, J., et al. (2016). The Future of Energy: Renewable Sources and their Role in the Economy. Energy Policy Journal.
  • Feygina, I., Jost, J. T., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2009). System Justification and the Meaning of Life: The Role of the U.S. in the Global Economy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
  • Falkner, R. (2016). The Paris Agreement and the New Global Governance of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.
  • Feng, Z., et al. (2023). Emerging Economies and the Future of Global Trade: Cooperation and Competition. Journal of International Commerce and Economics.
  • Giuliannotti, R. (2002). Globalization and Social Change. University of California Press.
  • Jost, J. T. (2009). The Role of Social Identity in Political Conflict: The Case of the American Left and Right. Social Justice Research.
  • Karimi, A. (2008). Imperialism and the Politics of Post-Colonialism: Resistance and Reconciliation. Journal of Global Studies.
  • Kirshner, J. (2008). Political Economy in the Age of Globalization: Economic Dynamics and Political Outcomes. Journal of Political Dynamics.
  • Mayer, A. S., & Dahrendorf, R. (1960). The Future of Capitalism: A Review of Trends and Challenges. Harvard University Press.
  • Miller, M. (1977). Political Order in Changing Societies: The Consequences of Economic Transformation. Yale University Press.
  • Mudge, S. L. (2008). The Politics of Social Capital in the Global Economy. Journal of Political Theory.
  • Myles, J., & Quadagno, J. (2002). Political Economy of Welfare and the State: Implications for Policy and Public Opinion. Journal of Social Policy.
  • Paul, T. V. (2005). The U.S. Global Engagement and the Future of World Order. World Politics Journal.
  • Prasad, E., & Ye, L. (2012). The Global Economy: Shifting from Western Values to Emerging Markets. Journal of International Commerce.
  • Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International Responses to Technological Change: A Political Economy Perspective. Journal of Globalization Studies.
  • Sahlins, M. (1999). Global Capitalism: The Growth of a Global Economy and its Impact. University of Chicago Press.
  • Sutcliffe, A. (2004). The Political Economy of Globalization: Patterns of Economic Change. Routledge.
  • Taskinsoy, J. (2019). Cryptocurrencies: The Future of Money in a Changing Economic Landscape. Journal of Digital Economics.
  • Tan, A. (1998). Economic Blocs and the Emerging World Order. International Political Economy Journal.
  • Weiss, L., et al. (2022). The Implications of Military Engagements on Global Order: A Historical Analysis. Foreign Affairs.
  • Wijen, F., & Ansari, S. (2007). Institutional Change and Global Climate Governance: The Role of Environmental Justice. Environmental Policy and Governance.
← Prev Next →