In the preceding chapters, we have seen how economic nationalism functions as a lure for both economic policy and political dynamics. Its associated zero-sum thinking is a default in many circumstances, even though the majority of relevant contexts are not actually zero sum. We have also seen that economic nationalism, including ethnonationalism, pandemic nationalism and techno-nationalism, can set back actual economic and human welfare in multiple ways. Overcoming these defaults represents a perennial, major challenge for human progress. Nonetheless, before we conclude this book, we need to give economic nationalism its due.

Giving Economic Nationalism Its Due

This book has been quite harsh on economic nationalism in its various forms, but there are elements of it that are worthwhile and contribute to our understanding of the world. Going back to mercantilism, for example, there was a serious attempt to explore how the economic world worked and to begin to engage in real economic analysis. As stated in Chapter 2, the conception of the balance of payments possessed by some mercantilist writers was far superior to many present-day politicians. If their equation of power and plenty was too strong, they did at least identify two categories of concern that are relevant to this day.

There is less positive to say about Friedrich List and his vision of an imperial Germany. Nonetheless, his identification of both infant industry protection and the role of talented immigrants has relevance to this day. Unfortunately, his early followers also included imperial Japan, and his modern followers have both taken infant industry protection too seriously but not seriously enough. Retuning to this concept, modernizing it, and making it compatible with WTO law as a DFT remains a project surprisingly neglected. That said, we need to keep in mind that List and his followers wholeheartedly ignore the central role of services in modern economies, reducing the relevance of their ideas.

While economic nationalists often take zero-sum thinking for granted, their doing so has inspired researchers in other fields (political psychology, negotiations theory) to examine it in some detail. This examination reminds us that central concepts in economics can be difficult to understand and communicate and that, consequently, various forms of heuristic substitution are an inevitable default.