Top 71 Protectionism Quotes & Sayings

The philosophy of protectionism is a philosophy of war. The wars of our age are not at variance with popular economic doctrines; they are, on the contrary, the inescapable result of a consistent application of these doctrines.

Protectionism in all its forms should be rejected, and efforts should be made to discipline measures that constitute barriers to trade.

Consider trade protectionism. It's been tried - and found wanting - since the Great Depression.

But public works, economic protectionism, cheap money, "deficit-financed government spending," and "the animal spirits of the spendthrift in the service of boosting "consumption demand"... Doesn't Keynesianism simply appeal to the worst in human nature?

Trade protectionism has an American lineage dating back to the Founders; that lineage is distinct from white nationalism.

We don't want protectionism at the heart of the European Union.

What protectionism teaches us, is to do to ourselves in time of peace what enemies seek to do to us in time of war.

A form of protectionism should be enforced at national level, at least on strategic areas such as agriculture.

Germany is the biggest economy of Europe and we need Germany on board for the economic reforms of Europe, including, of course, the deepening of the internal market, resisting protectionism, and supporting further economic policy coordination.

We have to remember we're in a global economy. The purpose of fiscal stimulus is not simply to sustain activity in our national economies, but to help the global economy as well, and that's why it's so critical that measures in those packages avoid anything that smacks of protectionism.

Engineers in the developed world should be arguing not for protectionism but for trade agreements that seek to establish rules that result in a real rise in living standards. This will ensure that outsourcing is a positive force in the developing nations economy and not an exploitative one.

Internal protectionism in Europe would be deadly, really a disaster for European economies.

There are legitimate concerns and anxieties that the forces of globalisation are leaving too many people behind - and we have to take those concerns seriously and address them. But the answer isn't to turn inward and embrace protectionism. We can't just walk away from trade.

The 'low' quality of many American films, and of much American popular culture, induces many art lovers to support cultural protectionism. Few people wish to see the cultural diversity of the world disappear under a wave of American market dominance.

Threats of trade protectionism, plus unilateral actions on the exchange-rate front, such as the heavy interventions of China, Japan, and Switzerland in the currency markets - not to mention the retaliatory tariffs recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives - endanger growth prospects and could further depress financial market confidence.

Oh, do you want protectionism? No, I don't. I just don't want to give my country away to China.

Protectionism is a misnomer. The only people protected by tariffs, quotas and trade restrictions are those engaged in uneconomic and wasteful activity. Free trade is the only philosophy compatible with international peace and prosperity.

Yes, we're in a protectionist era because when you have lack of domestic growth, everybody tries to unload the problem on foreigners with protectionism, devaluations, cutbacks on imports. But is there going to be a dramatic change? TPP is dead anyway, and similar deals in the eurozone are going nowhere.

Racial, globalist free markets hasn't worked for everybody in America - hasn't worked for at least the white working, or lower middle class in America don't perceive that it has worked very well for them. It hasn't served everybody, and a bit of protectionism - for many American voters - seems like quite an attractive thing.

Free trade, far from protectionism, is the path that we should take to make Latin America a thriving actor in the global economy.

The philosophy of protectionism is a philosophy of war.

Inflationism, however, is not an isolated phenomenon. It is only one piece in the total framework of politico-economic and socio-philosophical ideas of our time. Just as the sound money policy of gold standard advocates went hand in hand with liberalism, free trade, capitalism and peace, so is inflationism part and parcel of imperialism, militarism, protectionism, statism and socialism.

Social unrest and protectionism are the two major risks of the world economic crisis.

I'm not talking about autarky. I'm not crazy. We need an intelligent protectionism.

We have to be vigilant against protectionism and be constantly making the argument for free trade.

Protectionism is the institutionalization of economic failure.

If the United States wants access to Chinese, Indian or Vietnamese markets, we must get access to theirs. U.S. protectionism is very subtle but it is very much there.

If Trump wants to appeal to protectionism, the president should be protecting Americans from global warming and the accompanying extreme weather that's becoming more common.

If credit expansion, protectionism, and government spending were a path to prosperity, mankind would have long ago created heaven on earth.

Protectionism has never been an answer, will never be an answer. We need trade. We need trade agreements worldwide.

Earlier ages fortified themselves behind the sovereign state, behind protectionism and militarism.

It is against this concept of the sovereign state, a state isolated by protectionism and militarism, that internationalism must now engage in decisive battle.

Conservative statesmen from Alexander Hamilton to Ronald Reagan sometimes supported protectionism, and at other times, they leaned toward lowering barriers. But they always understood that trade policy was merely a tool for building a strong and independent country with a prosperous middle class.

Protectionism, socialism, all varieties of state favoritism and restrictions on competition, and the growth of bureaucracy and jobbery were the means by which special interests sought to exploit the public, the great mass of consumers and taxpayers.

Rich country protectionism - barriers, subsidies and support - mean that the world supply of agricultural goods is artificially increased and world prices depressed.

The analysis in the era of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher was that government was interfering with the efficiency of the economy through protectionism, government subsidies, and government ownership. Once the government "got out of the way," private markets would allocate resources efficiently and generate robust growth. Development would simply come.

Engineers in the developed world should be arguing not for protectionism but for trade agreements that seek to establish rules that result in a real rise in living standards. This will ensure that outsourcing is a positive force in the developing nation's economy and not an exploitative one.

The notion that somehow through a trade war or protectionism or magical thinking that we're going to return to a romanticized economic past is, in the end, going to be an illusion. And a severe disappointment to millions of decent, hard-working people.

The latest rule is: you cannot have protectionism - otherwise you will get a world war. Other rules say you cannot have collective ideas that involve the surrender of the individual to the group - otherwise, you get totalitarianism or, even worse, religion.

What generates war is the economic philosophy of nationalism: embargoes, trade and foreign exchange controls, monetary devaluation, etc. The philosophy of protectionism is a philosophy of war.

I think the Respublican party's lost its way. We have given into nativism and protectionism. And I think that, if we're going to be a governing party in the future, and a majority party, we have got to go back to traditional conservatism, limited government, economic freedom, individual responsibility, respect for free trade. Those are the principles that made us who we are.

Libertarianism is rejected by the modern left - which preaches individualism but practices collectivism. Capitalism is rejected by the modern right-which preaches enterprise but practices protectionism.

The vast majority of Americans are employed in service sector industries, and many of those sectors are highly internationalized. The most high-value added sectors, notably the tech sector, is massively globalized. And, for them, it would be a disaster if America's trade policy was to go down a spiraling route towards protectionism.

Protectionism is something that will hurt everybody, but especially the United States.

The E.U., China, and Japan all talk free trade, and they all practice protectionism.

We have to resist, protectionism, other kinds of barriers to market access and to trade.

We need to fight protectionism with everything that we have because when there's a level playing field and when you have open markets and when free trade is flourishing, American workers, American farmers, Americans are going to benefit.

Protectionism is a very real danger. It is understandable that in times of a severe downturn protectionist pressures mount but the lessons of history are clear. If we give in to protectionist pressures, we will only send the world into a downward spiral.

China has an interest that's very much like ours in one respect, and that is they want a stable world. They don't want war. They don't want to see protectionism. They don't want to see the world break out into various forms of chaos.

Nationalism makes us poor because its Siamese twin, protectionism, will destroy the internal market and disrupt international trade.

The United States can't keep a completely open system if the rest of the world is less open. The United States may have to take a leaf out of the book of Japan, China, and Germany, and have protectionism inside the system.

The biggest flaw in the Trump economic plan is the tilt toward protectionism. I have parted company with him on this. The question here is whether his campaign bark will turn out to be bigger than his government-policy bite.

Protectionism will do little to create jobs and if foreigners retaliate, we will surely lose jobs.

Europe should stick to an open economy, to competition and we should refuse protectionism. It will not save one single job in the long run to protect non-competitive industries.

Developing protectionism regarding trade and our reluctance to place fiscal policy on a more sustainable path are threatening what may well be our most valued policy asset: the increased flexibility of our economy, which has fostered our extraordinary resilience to shocks.

Protectionism has to be avoided. Protectionism is not only on goods but also in the area of services. Financial protectionism is also bad and should be avoided.

I don't want to stop and build protectionism out there, but I certainly don't mind tough negotiation with our trade partners.

With the election of Trump, America's soft power has taken a big hit. The United States has moved from a position of leadership in the creation of a rules-based international system to a position of leadership in its destruction and the creation of a regime of global protectionism. The damage will be long-lasting.

But I think that the spirit of protectionism would be the grave of European cinema. You cannot protect something by building a fence around it and thinking that this will help it survive.

The message from history is so blatantly obvious - that free trade causes mutual prosperity while protectionism causes poverty - that it seems incredible that anybody ever thinks otherwise. There is not a single example of a country opening its borders to trade and ending up poorer.