BBC Sounds, Music, Radio, podcasts.

Good evening. The World Economic Order, which President Trump is now threatening to beat to death with a barrage of tariffs, has always been seen by its champions, at least, as a moral universe as much as a global trading system.

For hasn't it given poorer people in rich countries cheap food and goods,

previously the privilege of the bourgeoisie? Hasn't it lifted billions of poor people in what

were poor countries out of their poverty? Didn't it simply make sense? As Free Trade's founding

father Adam Smith said, there's no point in building glass houses to grow grapes in Glasgow

when you can buy cheap wine from France. John Maynard Keynes, deploring an earlier bout of protectionism

he had once advocated, blamed human nature. Men have always devised ways to impoverish themselves

and one another, he said, and prefer collective animosity

to individual happiness. And yet, the exporting of whole industries to countries with lower

labour costs has left swathes of workers and entire communities as casualties.

Outsourcing critical industries and raw materials to countries

we can't count on as friends leaves us strategically vulnerable. Shifting so much stuff around

puts pressure on the planet. Philosophically, if self-reliance is a virtue for individuals,

why not for nations? Is free trade a moral good?

That's our moral maze tonight.

The panel, Anne McHelvoy, executive editor of the News and Commentary website Politico.

Ash Sarker from the Navarra Media Group, James Orr, an associate professor of the philosophy of religion at Cambridge University,

and Matthew Taylor, Chief Executive of the NHS Confederation. How do you see this, Matthew?

I accept that selective tariffs may sometimes be justified in very specific circumstances, but I don't

think that's what's been going on in America. I think Trump's case is, his moral case is bogus,

but I'm keen to explore it further.

...