What the history of the textile industry tells us about reviving manufacturing in the United States.

That ship has sailed

Among the many benefits the Trump administration claims that will come from its on-again, off-again tariff policy is that it will restore American manufacturing. Economic experts disagree, stating that many of the administration’s stated tariff goals contradict each other. For example, if, by some miracle, more manufacturing could be brought back to the United States, so that American consumers buy American-made products rather than those from overseas, the revenue from tariffs would decrease. Additionally, the cost to consumers of American products would increase.

Another factor that needs to be taken into account is that once a particular category of manufacturing has fled a country, its return is improbable. The textile industry is a historical case in point. Manufacturing shifts over time in response to economic and financial advantages, and merely imposing tariffs on one sector is unlikely to be the driving factor in getting it to return.

In the 18^th century, during the Industrial Revolution, England became the world’s textile powerhouse due to technological advances such as the spinning jenny and the power loom. English manufacturers capitalized on these innovations and expanded global trade in textiles. In addition to the technological advantages, as a colonial power, England used its colonies to provide resources and finished products, which contributed to its global dominance. It should be noted that before the Industrial Revolution, textiles were handmade in cottage industries until the advent of machinery and factories displaced them.

In the 1780s, English technology was brought to the United States. This, along with American technology, such as the invention of the cotton gin, brought about an industrial revolution in the United States. As England’s dominance waned, the textile industry moved to the U.S. northeast, drawn by the availability of raw materials, water power, and labor. In addition, the U.S. had been one of England’s largest markets for textiles, but with cheaper labor and abundant raw materials close at hand, American textile manufacturers had a competitive advantage. The textile industry moved yet again.

But, it didn’t stay in the northeast for long. From the late 19^th to the early 20th century, the textile industry abandoned the northeast for the southern U.S. where labor and land were cheaper, leaving many nearly empty factory towns along the East Coast that have never fully recovered.

The latest shift has been towards Asia, where labor and land is even cheaper and local laws are less restrictive. The first landing was in China with its immense labor market, but it is shifting even now towards the countries of Southeast Asia as China’s economy grows and labor costs rise. The motivation for these late 20th-century moves also includes favorable export policies.

It is unlikely that even high tariffs will prompt the textile industry to relocate to the United States, let alone

the American South. When I was an American diplomat assigned in Southeast Asia, I had extensive contact with American companies that produce sports apparel and footwear. An executive of one of these companies once told me that, in response to complaints about offshoring, his company had opened a factory in the northeast U.S. to test the feasibility of moving its manufacturing back to the U.S. After about 18 months of operation, it abandoned the effort. Not only were production costs much higher than those of their Southeast Asia operations, but the quality of production was markedly lower. “No American consumer wanted to buy the stuff from that plant,” he said.

Even with high tariffs on their foreign-made products, they performed better than they would have with U.S. production.

Reviving U.S. manufacturing, akin to the shifts in the textile industry, requires more than just tariffs. Sustainable revival demands strategic innovation and adaptation to global dynamics rather than protectionism. It also, I think, requires that we accept that some industries will never return, and that maybe, rather than aspiring to produce everything in America, we should assess where we have a competitive advantage and develop programs to train workers for those industries, creating a win-win situation for everyone.