A Troubling Signal in the U.S.

A troubling signal is emerging in the United States. On May 2, California Governor Gavin Newsom spoke out about the devastating impact of the Trump administration's tariff policies on American tourism, trade, and the economy. He noted that California has suffered billions of dollars in direct and indirect economic losses due to these policies. Newsom also emphasized that California has always been a "stable trading partner" with China and remains open to all trading partners, because global trade is not a zero-sum game but a mutually dependent relationship. It's worth mentioning that California is the most economically powerful state in the U.S. and was the first to sue the Trump administration over tariffs. So, why is this news a troubling signal?

In our understanding, American states are somewhat like our provinces, but the U.S. is a federal system, and "states" are more like "states" in a federal structure. Many might recall when I mentioned that during arguments with the British about certain issues, casually bringing up "Scottish independence" or "Welsh independence" doesn't really work. The UK is a "United Kingdom" made up of regions that are almost like separate countries. If you argue with a British person this way, thinking you've hit a nerve, you might feel triumphant. But if you're dealing with a Scot, Welsh, or Northern Irish person, they might not even react, because it doesn't affect them directly. The real strategy is to first identify whether the person is from England, Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland. If they're not English, emphasizing that we share the same ethnicity and that the Han population in some Chinese provinces is higher than in the UK can leave them speechless. If they are English, calling for broader issues might have some effect, but it's still limited. In that case, calling for "Cornish independence" would really get their attention. Why? Because while most of England is predominantly English, there's a region called Cornwall in the southwest, where the Cornish people live. Like the Scots and Welsh, they are a minority group. So, calling for "Cornish independence" would strike a nerve with the English.

What's the point of this analogy? We need to understand that there's a fundamental difference in perception. China has been a unified, centrally governed country since the Qin Dynasty. But countries like the UK and the U.S., which are Anglo-Saxon in tradition, have a history of federalism, and their perspectives on related issues are quite different. The U.S. federal system has also evolved over time. To put it in historical context, the power dynamics among U.S. states have gone through three major phases.

From the founding of the U.S. until the end of the Civil War, it was like the "era of the Zhou emperor." Back then, a U.S. state was almost like a sovereign country. If you look at the U.S. Constitution, you'll see that the president's powers were very limited, mainly in defense and foreign affairs, with little say in other matters. From the Civil War to the Great Depression, it was like the "era of regional warlords." The Civil War destroyed the "legitimacy" of states seceding from the Union. This "legitimacy" is similar to how, in the "era of the Zhou emperor," different regions could choose to declare themselves kings or not. For example, the state of Chu declared itself a kingdom as early as 704 BC, followed by Wu and Yue. The central states only started declaring themselves kings during the Warring States period. At that time, without an emperor, a king was the highest ruler. In the later Tang Dynasty, there was a period of regional warlords, where the era of emperors had long been established. It wasn't that no one dared to declare themselves emperor; it's just that anyone who did would quickly be attacked and overthrown.

Now, we're in the third era of U.S. state power, which is like a "semi-provincial" period. As we've discussed before, the Great Depression from 1929 to 1933 had a massive impact on the U.S., forcing it to strengthen central authority to tackle the crisis. Many states' powers were centralized during this time. The states became somewhat like our provinces, but there are still significant differences. For example, U.S. states have considerable legislative power, even extending into criminal law. A few years ago, states argued over abortion rights because some states passed laws that could send women to prison for having an abortion. The most significant difference is that U.S. states can maintain their own armed forces, called the National Guard, with the governor as the commander. For example, on August 1 last year, the California National Guard adjusted its soldiers' combat uniforms based on an order from the state's adjutant general and a major general of the Army National Guard, Matthew Bever. This move highlighted the unique status of the state's non-federal forces. People in uniforms and with weapons might not be regular federal troops but local National Guards. State governors can even mobilize their forces independently of the federal government. During Biden's presidency, when he tried to keep the borders open and sent people to block Texas from sealing its borders, it led to an armed standoff between Texas and the federal government. Republican states' National Guards were deployed to "support" Texas, with some even sending tanks by train. This is a significant difference.

With all this background in mind, let's talk about Governor Newsom's recent statements. On a smaller scale, it's about California seeking to expand its power. On a larger scale, since the U.S. became independent over 200 years ago, states' powers have been gradually diminishing. But now, due to Trump's tariff policies, which have caused widespread discontent and economic chaos, some states are stepping forward to reclaim more power, potentially rolling back to the "era of regional warlords" or even the "era of the Zhou emperor."

To sum up: First, we must never forget that the U.S. is a federal country, and there is indeed a possibility of scenarios like USA, USB, USC. Second, the strengthening of state power in the U.S. has been ongoing for many years, and it won't be easy to achieve a complete split into A, B, C. Unless there's a sudden event, it will likely go through the stages of returning to the "era of regional warlords" and the "era of the Zhou emperor" before reaching the A, B, C stage. But regardless, Trump's tariff war has caused economic turmoil and widespread discontent. Some states are looking for their own solutions and even showing signs of conflict with the federal government. This is a very troubling signal for the United States.