I think the US has been self-centered for quite some time, and there was a hilarious thread in a different article that went into the idea that America is the world-policeman that everyone wants but... yea, for equal treatment and to avoid regulatory capture - one needs to avoid that dying empire.
>> works against the interests of the United States though
FTA: "“Our ultimate goal is to reach an agreement with the E.U. to end all W.T.O.-inconsistent subsidies to large civil aircraft,” Mr. Lighthizer said."
As a US citizen I don't see anything controversial about this stance.
The general idea of protectionism is less controversial - I think it is generally bad[1] due to the economic effects of it. But if you're in favor of protectionism you can check any claim you have to free-market economics or de-regulation for growth at the door, protectionism is basically the Ur-form of regulatory capture and state-capitalism so being pro-Boeing subsidies and then claiming that the US becoming "socialist" is terrible is just logically inconsistent.
[1] I'd leave the notable exception of when it's used to specifically stimulate economic sector growth - propping up a robotics company in TN to create a labour pool that enables other companies to grow out of the labour availability is a pretty good usage.
>> Your tax dollars are going to prop up a failing company
Anyone who suggests that France is not 'France first' or that Switzerland is not 'Switzerland first' etc. etc. has not been paying attention.
/s