Does Brexit Mark A New Age Of Global Protectionism?

By Sara Mathes on July 5, 2016

Since the UK’s entrance into the European Union in 1973 (then the European Economic Community), England has enjoyed the benefits of free trade with the 28 members of the EU. However, it has also been the landing site of many European immigrants hoping to find jobs.

Proponents of Brexit argued that the UK’s membership in the EU allowed states with weaker economies to hitch a free ride on the strong economy of the UK. In consequence, many of these recent immigrants to the UK have been viewed as a symptom of an exploitative relationship with the EU and have provoked contempt from out-of-work citizens who feel they have been displaced. Calls for protection of the British working citizen mobilized about 52 percent of voters, who voted “leave” in the referendum in June. With its call for protectionism, Brexit certainly represents a counter movement to the doctrines of globalization and free trade, which have gone almost unquestioned in the west since the second World War.

British Guard (flickr.com)

China, one of the few states to continue to boast protectionist policies that prioritize domestic products (using high tariffs among other tools), has undergone global crossfire on the subject for years. With its cheap labor and protected market, China has climbed the rungs of world power dutifully and swiftly, provoking worried glances from the traditional global powerhouses in the west. Perhaps due to this, China has been critiqued for its rigid and seemingly withholding international trade policies.

In fact, Donald Trump, republican presumptive nominee, recently dubbed China a “currency manipulator,” essentially calling China’s evaluation of its own currency a ploy to make its goods more competitive in the world market. Trump represents a similar wave of thought in the states as Brexit did in the UK. His battering slogans of “make America great again,” and “put America first” evoke a similar line of protectionist, nationalistic rhetoric. He stands against free trade deals like NAFTA, which is highly unusual for a republican candidate (in this day and age).

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is for continuing the era of free trade. However, she does oppose TPP (the Trans-Pacific Partnership), a proposed free trade agreement with the U.S. and 11 other countries, stating that it does not meet her standards for job creation and security. 

This move away from free trade could represent a push left from her opponent Bernie Sanders. He and other liberal politicians like Sen. Elizabeth Warren argue that free trade agreements, while they might promote overall prosperity globally, actually promote inequality within countries. Those who once had steady blue collar work are losing out to cheap labor abroad. Thus, while the rich CEOs of companies make wider profit margins thanks to this cheap labor, the working class struggles.

So, Brexit provokes the question: Is bigger really better? Or will large-scale free trade deals break apart in favor of smaller country-to-country negotiations?

Sources:

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Free_Trade.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/Donald_Trump.htm

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/11/heres-why-everyone-is-arguing-about-free-trade.html

Follow Uloop

Apply to Write for Uloop News

Join the Uloop News Team

Discuss This Article

Get Top Stories Delivered Weekly

Back to Top

Log In

Contact Us

Upload An Image

Please select an image to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format
OR
Provide URL where image can be downloaded
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format

By clicking this button,
you agree to the terms of use

By clicking "Create Alert" I agree to the Uloop Terms of Use.

Image not available.

Add a Photo

Please select a photo to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format