I don't think the essence of the German-Asian argument (to use the author's framing), or, for that matter, the "third way" championed by the Asian Tiger economi

I don't think the essence of the German-Asian argument (to use the author's framing), or, for that matter, the "third way" championed by the Asian Tiger economies, is so much protectionism--though protectionism is undeniably crucial--as a certain degree of state-guided capitalism. This is covered by the "process vs. result" part of the article. In the Anglo-American view, there are two possibilities and two possibilities only: (1) unbridled laissez-faire capitalism with a minimum of regulation, and (2) Soviet-style central planning. In reality, there's a fairly smooth continuum of in-between options, where the power and dynamism of markets can be harnessed but still subordinated to broad development goals and national macroeconomic priorities.