World Trade, Imperial Fantasies and Protectionism: Can You Really Have Your Cake and Eat It Too?

C. Nagy
{"title":"World Trade, Imperial Fantasies and Protectionism: Can You Really Have Your Cake and Eat It Too?","authors":"C. Nagy","doi":"10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.26.1.0087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Populism is telling voters what they want to hear, knowing that it is neither true, nor feasible. Lately, trade and economic integration has seen the spread of untrue and unfeasible tenets, which have proved to be highly popular and have received a warm welcome. Fueled by imperial fantasies and nostalgia for the long-gone era of protectionism, the tectonic movements of world trade have generated a good deal of populist resistance based on the self-delusion that the Gordian knot of world trade needs not to be disentangled but can be simply cut. Unfortunately, however popular and appealing these allegations are, they are not true. Reverting to protectionism simply does not pay out and faces two major, arguably unsurmountable, hurdles: the economic realities, which show that protectionism comes at a very high price even to those it strives to protect, and the disciplines of the WTO, which very much limit unilateral measures inspired by purely protectionist desires. This paper demonstrates three points. First, the modus operandi of international trade makes frontal protectionism self-destructing. Second, the current regime of world trade law developed under the auspices of the WTO significantly limits protectionist policies and leaves no room for a comprehensive protectionist policy. Third, while \"taking back control\" is an appealing yell, catering to the deepest tribal instincts, in reality, unimpeded sovereignty and unlimited freedom of action are increasingly a wishful thinking.","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"26 1","pages":"132 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.26.1.0087","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT:Populism is telling voters what they want to hear, knowing that it is neither true, nor feasible. Lately, trade and economic integration has seen the spread of untrue and unfeasible tenets, which have proved to be highly popular and have received a warm welcome. Fueled by imperial fantasies and nostalgia for the long-gone era of protectionism, the tectonic movements of world trade have generated a good deal of populist resistance based on the self-delusion that the Gordian knot of world trade needs not to be disentangled but can be simply cut. Unfortunately, however popular and appealing these allegations are, they are not true. Reverting to protectionism simply does not pay out and faces two major, arguably unsurmountable, hurdles: the economic realities, which show that protectionism comes at a very high price even to those it strives to protect, and the disciplines of the WTO, which very much limit unilateral measures inspired by purely protectionist desires. This paper demonstrates three points. First, the modus operandi of international trade makes frontal protectionism self-destructing. Second, the current regime of world trade law developed under the auspices of the WTO significantly limits protectionist policies and leaves no room for a comprehensive protectionist policy. Third, while "taking back control" is an appealing yell, catering to the deepest tribal instincts, in reality, unimpeded sovereignty and unlimited freedom of action are increasingly a wishful thinking.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
世界贸易、帝国幻想和保护主义:你真的能鱼与熊掌兼得吗?
摘要:民粹主义是在告诉选民他们想听什么,但他们知道这既不真实,也不可行。最近,贸易和经济一体化出现了不真实和不可行的原则的传播,这些原则已被证明非常受欢迎,并受到热烈欢迎。在帝国主义幻想和对早已过去的保护主义时代的怀念的推动下,世界贸易的结构性运动产生了大量民粹主义抵制,这些抵制基于这样一种自欺欺人的想法,即世界贸易的棘手问题不需要解开,而可以简单地割断。不幸的是,无论这些指控多么受欢迎和有吸引力,它们都不是真的。恢复保护主义根本于事无补,面临着两个可以说是不可逾越的主要障碍:经济现实表明,保护主义即使对它努力保护的人来说也要付出高昂的代价,而世贸组织的纪律在很大程度上限制了纯粹保护主义欲望所激发的单方面措施。本文论证了三点。首先,国际贸易的运作方式使正面保护主义自我毁灭。第二,目前在世贸组织主持下制定的世界贸易法制度极大地限制了保护主义政策,没有留下全面保护主义政策的余地。第三,尽管“夺回控制权”是一种呼吁,迎合了最深层的部落本能,但在现实中,不受阻碍的主权和无限的行动自由越来越成为一厢情愿的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Managing Digital Resale in the Era of International Exhaustion The Digital Transformation of Tax Systems Progress, Pitfalls, and Protection in a Danish Context Blockchain and the Right to Good Administration: Adding Blocks to or Blocking of the Globalization of Good Administration? The Risk of Digitalization: Transforming Government into a Digital Leviathan Guilty of Probable Cause: Public Arrest Records and Dignity in the Information Age
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1