Perhaps you have missed the point of the article? It is not arguing that there haven't been great benefits to trade, nor is it arguing for strong protectionism.

Perhaps you have missed the point of the article? It is not arguing that there haven't been great benefits to trade, nor is it arguing for strong protectionism. Instead it is arguing that the strategy of easing up trade rules so US corps could go into China, which it was thought would ultimately tame China into becoming a more free and open society, has backfired both figuratively and literally (as was shown with US entertainment). China is now exerting political and cultural control over the US via its corporations, which at least from the perspective of the US, is not a desirable outcome. You can argue that lots of jobs and economic prosperity has been created and this is a fair trade for some independence lost, but most of the benefits have gone to China rather than the US.