The Case for Free Markets and Decreased Protectionism

The Group of Twenty has, for all intents and purposes, replaced the G7 in the formulation
of global economic and political policy making, but much work still needs to be done.
While others in this space may discuss how the G20 must focus on the European debt
crisis, development in the under-developed parts of the globe, energy technology, climate
change, and currency, I think that protectionism, an undercurrent issue that affects
practically all else, continues to hamper the global economic recovery. Countries that
have large amounts of protectionist tendencies within the G20, such as China and Russia,
do so because their main concerns are domestic and their primary objective is to increase
the power of the state. China’s actions against Google in favor of Baidu demonstrate
this point, as does the lack of a strong and independent judiciary and respect for the rule
of law in both these countries. The bottom line is that protectionist tendencies restrict
international trade and undermine the ability of free-market economies to create jobs,
ironically undermining the global growth model that has been so successful in the past
sixty years. Proponents of the free market economies within the G20, such as the U.S.,
the E.U., and Japan, need to work more in synch to aptly demonstrate that the free-market
system still works, and that state-dominated economies cannot achieve the same amount
of market efficiency and technological growth as free market economies.