Conservative orthodoxy once held that the free market was the key to America’s economic success. In this view, Milton Friedman was a laissez-faire prophet. The Soviet Union was the sclerotic alternative. Ronald Reagan captured Republican sentiment when he said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.”

That’s not how President Trump — or his party — feels. The president wields tariffs to boost American companies. Populist Republicans in Congress back government subsidies to juice manufacturing. The United States is taking a 10 percent stake in Intel and a 15 percent cut of sales by Nvidia, both chipmakers. And Trump wants to replace the people who run the independent Federal Reserve with more compliant appointees. Protectionism, industrial policy and government ownership — all once conservative boogeymen — are now official doctrine.

In today’s newsletter, I speak with several of The Times’s expert beat reporters about the new state interventions.

A stockholder

Lauren Hirsch, who covers Wall Street, answers these questions.

Trump wants to help Intel compete with chipmakers abroad that are doing much better. But how does a government ownership stake work?

On paper, the government put a few limitations on its role as a shareholder. It has agreed to side with the Intel board on most issues requiring a shareholder vote. (This usually includes things like selection of board directors and approval over major deals.) As a result, Intel’s other shareholders will now have less sway. But the government still has the power of the bully pulpit. What happens if Trump posts online that he would like Intel to build a factory in a certain state?