Seeing off the extreme Right with progressive protectionism Fascists are defined as "authoritarian," "seeking a dictator" and "suppressors of democracy." By contrast I have been an environmental activist for decades and, like the think tank Compass (who last week published my paper "Progressive Protectionism" in their Thinkpiece series), the basis of my work has been to persuade, write, organise and lobby for democratic changes that will reorientate our present economic system such that it does not harm the planet and does improve social conditions. The second thing to make clear is that progressive protectionism would not involve a return to the oxymoronic protectionism of the 30s. Then the goal was often for each protected industry or country to increase its economic strength by limiting imports, and then hoping to compete and export globally at the expense of others. Unsurprisingly, the more countries did this, the less trade there was between them. Today's example of a self-defeating economic approach is the ludicrous fantasies of export fetishists. They whistle in the dark trying to keep up the nation's economic spirits by promising hi-tech export-led growth. In an era of rising Asian dominance, this has to rate as the last colonial delusion. The alternative to this is a progressive protectionism which will allow countries to wean themselves off of present levels of export dependence. It would enable the rebuilding and re-diversification of domestic economies by limiting what goods states let in and what funds they allow to enter or leave the country. Having regained control of their economic future, countries can then set the levels of taxes and agree the regulations needed to fund and facilitate this transition. National competition laws would ensure that monopolies didn't develop behind protective barriers. Finally, there is an internationally supportive approach to trade with poorer countries, ensuring that the gains from the remaining international trade would be targeted to help fund the move towards a localised economy that benefits the poor majority. In essence, this approach will make space for domestic funding and business to meet most of the needs of society worldwide. This taking back of national control over the economy is the only way to tackle the financial, social and environmental crises, return local power to citizens and provide a sense of security and hope for the future, particularly amongst the young. If implemented it could play a crucial role in seeing off the rise of the extreme Right, as this invariably flourishes when the sense of insecurity within the majority worsens. At present none of the policies offered by parties of any political hue are likely to tackle this in the way that progressive protectionism can. Of course such a radical change in economic direction could not be introduced in one country alone, since the money markets would ferociously destabilise such a challenge to their present dominance of the world economy. Europe is facing huge threats from the forces of international finance, yet the continent would be a powerful enough bloc to implement a programme of progressive protectionism, particularly if the politically active and beneficiaries like small and medium sized business started to campaign for it. By contrast the beak future favoured by free marketeers like Tim Worstall is one that would ride roughshod over the democratic desires of voters. Surveys show that around 70 per cent of French favour some form of protection for domestic production from cheaper, lower waged competitors. Yet dismal economic commentators are gleefully pointing out that the ratings agencies will soon punish such democratic impudence. It is cruel hubris such as this which will ensure the growing rise of the extreme right, not those looking for a more democratic, more economically secure route to protecting and rediversifying local economies worldwide. Colin Hines is the author of the forthcoming book 'Progressive Protectionism'