Comment Socialism or Protectionism? DAVID MCNALLY T hese are odd times for the Canadian Left. The debate in recent years over the Mulroney government's trade agreement with the United States appears to have redefined the very terrain of socialist politics. In response to the trade deal, many former left-wing critics of social democracy adopted a position decidedly to the right of the NDP during the recent federal election. They did so by calling for support for the Liberal Party in those ridings where the Liberal candidate stood the best chance of defeating the Tory (and the free trade deal), as part of a "tactical alliance" to "save Canada's sovereignty.t" Given this context, it should perhaps come as no surprise to read Michael Lebowitz's call (in Studies in Political Economy No. 27) for labour and the Left to embrace a strategy of protectionism.f The essence of Lebowitz's argument is that in an era of globally-integrated and internationally-mobile "strong capi- tal," the working class has no option but to resort to protec- tionist solutions in its struggle to defend its interests. In this respect, his piece might be seen as merely another ex- ample of efforts by the Left in many countries "to promote a kind of jingoistic populism to respond to this inter- nationalism of business.,,3 What distinguishes Lebowitz's article from much of the Left's recent embrace of pure and simple nationalism, however, is that the argument is set forth in explicitly Marxist terms, as an extension of Marx's critique of political economy. In what follows, I shall at- tempt to challenge the linchpins of this analysis. I will argue that Lebowitz's one-sided theory of "strong capital" leads Studies in Political Economy 31, Spring 1990 159