The Waitrose vs Lidl divide

Apparently there is now a divide in the Tory Party, one characterised by an adherence to the Waitrose, or Lidl, principles. We think this an excellent manner of describing the rift and one reason we do so is that it makes the answer so obvious:

There’s a new divide in the Conservative party: Waitrose or Lidl? But it’s not about which supermarket you shop at. It’s how you view a potential trade deal with the US.

As talks get under way across the pond, the cabinet is split between those who wish to prioritise British farmers and those who want their constituents to benefit from cheaper produce on the supermarket shelf.

This isn’t a rehash of remain v leave. Instead it’s about which part of the Tory voter coalition gets priority treatment: traditionally Tory rural constituencies or the post-industrial, “red wall” seats that the party won for the first time last December.

For those not entirely up with the details of the British class divide Waitrose is somewhere along the spectrum to Whole Foods in an organic, cruelty free and nicely fashionable sense, Lidl toward Dollar General and the pile it high and cheap form of retailing.

Or, as it is being used here, Waitrose is nice and kind to producers - in that fashionable sense - at cost to consumers, Lidl prioritises the interests of consumers. And that is the central question over the subject under discussion. Free trade puts the consumer first and protectionism pampers the producer by making everything more expensive to buy, consume or eat.

Now that we’ve got it laid out this way the answer is, as we say, obvious. For we have the example before us of the British retail scene - both Waitrose and Lidl thrive and survive. Those willing to hand over the money to boost their ethical concerns get to do so and do do so in their millions. Those who don’t don’t and also don’t in their millions. The only people unhappy with this outcome are those who would impose their own preferences on others but given that they’re anti-liberty we, as liberals, can ignore their desires.

That is, the solution to this dilemma over free trade is that there is no dilemma. For free trade allows both groups to do as they wish and not free trade does not. Therefore free trade it is then.