Second, a reactionary "countermovement" arises whereby society attempts to re-embed the economy through the creation of social protections such as labor laws and tariffs.
Since the market cannot produce invented fictitious commodities such as money, land, and labor at the right level of sustainable quantities, the government must involve in managing the supply and demand for the production process of these things.
The reliance of the movement of laissez-faire on the global situation also generated unavoidable competition which is a cause of weakness of the international state system.
Domestic counter-movement against nationalism showed a kind of loyalty to the adequate operation of the international economy in favor of chasing its own distinct way of development, which demands substantial management of markets from political power.
On the other hand, if policies are biased to the other goal, it disturbs the business environment and weakens the global status of the nation by diminishing sufficient foreign investment and resources.
The relative powers between these two rival movements are determined by the political and economic status and how social participants think about and act against those particular situations.
Polanyi backed up Marx's assertion that it is more influential in pursuing interests when people have a common ideology rather than an individual goal.
If it was not for the argument about commonly shared interests among social actors in a self-regulating market, the movement of laissez-faire would not have such a big impact on the global economy.
Mark Blyth's 2002 book Great Transformations is strongly influenced by Polanyi's work, in particular the notion of the double movement as the motor behind institutional change.
[2] Studies by David Cameron,[3] Dani Rodrik[4] and Peter Katzenstein[5] have affirmed the insights of the double movement, as they show that greater trade openness has been associated with increases in government social spending.