Unilateral American surrender is when we hand what was history’s most magnificent manufacturing base to a huge, communist country.
Last I knew, you don’t even live in America.
What’s your interest in jobs here? If you wouldn’t mind?
If you don't like it, then reduce Government-imposed burdens on American industry and American Wealth-production. Either compete with China, or admit you can't and go into industries where you can.
But don't force your taxpayers to featherbed selected domestic industries. That just turns them into particularly toxic components of an enlarged welfare system. See also: "General Motors"
Economies are not zero-sum games. The more true wealth-production in the world, the better.
Put another way: the less Socialist countries with repressed wealth-production in the world, the better.
If Americans are free to make stuff better, faster, cheaper then that's good news for me: not only does the average price of a Ford Focus come down, but also the success of unrestricted wealth-production acts as an example to other countries.
In this way Socialist ideas get rolled back worldwide. You can see how the two things are interrelated.
It is to everyone's advantage that Government is shrunk and wealth-production is increased: no matter which country we are talking about.
Here in the UK we already went through all the paroxyms with trying to save uncompetitive domestic industries. Does "British Leyland" ring a bell with anyone here? Well maybe not, but I'm pretty sure "General Motors" does.
British Leyland was a huge uncompetitive (and unionized, go figure!) auto-maker in the UK. The amount of taxpayer money and intellectual capital thrown at BL before its eventual, inevitable dissolution just doesn't bear thinking about.
When I say "reduce taxes: reduce bail-outs: push back on unions: let your industries compete or die" I have the appalling example of BL in my mind's eye.
Hope this was helpful.