THERE’S something about Theresa May that makes her the perfect leader for British voters who wistfully recall the days in the fifties when nobody locked their doors. So was it jarring for those “good ol’ days” supporters to watch May spending last week swanning around Indian temples draped in a colourful sari?

For me, it’s really not so curious when we remember the latest uncertainty surrounding Britain’s world role. For decades, the political establishment tried to make us the pivot between Europe and America, but that balloon has been well and truly punctured. So we’re falling back on Britain’s alleged good will as a former colonial power. May calls this “new business with old allies”.

Just because we’ve left the EU doesn’t mean we’ll abandon free trade, May argues. No indeed. Britain will be the “global champion of free trade”, because we’ll allow anything to freely pass our borders as long as it’s not a human being.

But alas here lies the problem. The bold Theresa imagined that Indian leaders would be jumping over each other to sign deals with Britain. Instead, she merely raised eyebrows as a curious throwback to the Empire. India, in truth, doesn’t need British goods these days. In May’s blissful 1950s idyll, nearly half of India’s imports came from Britain; today, the UK accounts for just two per cent of Indian trade.

What does India want from Britain? According to The Economist, India would like more freedom for its students to study at British universities and for its educated workforce to find jobs here. But under Theresa May’s reign as Home Secretary the number of Indian students in Britain collapsed from 68,000 to 12,000 due to hard-line new visa rules. “It seems the UK is mainly interested in greater market access for its goods in India and in getting investments in India, but not in attracting Indian services professionals and students,” complained one senior Indian politician.

So May’s Rudyard Kipling turn is a non-starter. For years the tabloids and Tories have built up a false narrative where freedom of movement is ruining British jobs, public services and identity. In England, they’ve done this successfully, as Brexit proved. Now they’re dealing with the consequences of success. If they want free trade privileges for British businesses, fine, but they can’t close off the borders to human beings.

Unintentionally, whether they admit it or not, the British political right have become the biggest enemies of free trade. Tories still believe they can negotiate to save the “baby” of trade while throwing out the “bathwater” of immigration. They can’t, and they won’t. Given current realignments in British Toryism, only the political centre and the left can save globalisation.

But that’s why we need to ask ourselves, is “free trade” always a good thing? The centre-left in Scotland and Britain are so eager to see the Tories in trouble that they happily overlook the problems with this doctrine. During Britain’s European Union referendum and during the Hillary Clinton campaign, liberals eulogised the economic benefits of free trade to a frankly embarrassing degree.

I fully support more immigration for both cultural and economic reasons. I also know that militarised borders won’t bring higher wages (only trade unions do that) and will probably mean the end of what’s left of civil liberties. And I’m endlessly appalled at what passes for punditry in Britain, the ridiculous scapegoating of immigrants and refugees for every last problem from an overstretched NHS to the decline of traditional Sunday roasts.

But there’s a danger that, in trying to save the baby of human tolerance, compassion and basic international norms, we end up keeping the bathwater of “free trade”. Sometimes, uncontrolled trade is a problem. Sometimes, national economies work best when they’re governed by strict trading rules and truly democratic governments – who’d have thought? And undemocratic trade agreements are partly responsible for the global chaos surrounding us today. Saying that doesn’t make you Donald Trump.

Many communities in America, Britain and the Global North gained nothing from globalisation. In the US, for example, real wages have been flat or falling for decades, and the benefits of growth largely went to the richest elites. Wealth failed to “trickle down”. Now things are even tougher, and just getting enough growth to feed the burgeoning demands of the richest one per cent is unlikely. It’s no wonder many ordinary people are anxious and insecure. In England, Scotland, America and just about everywhere, these people live in former industrial communities that aren’t traditional centres of political power. They see “politicians” as the enemy.

They used to vote centre-left. But increasingly they don’t, because the left wing are seen as the establishment. Opportunists like Trump, Farage and Le Pen have stepped in and offered simple, snake-oil answers. Ultimately, though, the fault lies with social democratic politicians who happily cashed in when the going was good and never stopped to ask themselves tough questions about the future. The new Trump era is a symptom of that failure.

If Britain thought about Brexit properly, it could be an opportunity. After all, the European Union is riddled with problems from head to toe. Unfortunately, the Brexit referendum went ahead without a plan and is being negotiated without an end game by the Tory hard-right.

Successful or not, the Tories are in a bind. Ultimately, they’re the party of big business and hedge fund managers, the class who provide the Tories with the cash to fight elections. But Brexit allowed them to build support among people whose communities suffered at the hands of a changing world economy, with more than a little help from the right-wing press. Politically, this outwitted Labour, but the Tories may have outwitted themselves too. If they’re closing the economy to people, how are Britain’s financial elites going to sell their services abroad?

Hence May’s visit to India. Of course, it was meant to put two fingers up to Brussels. But more pointedly, she meant to show the financial elite that capitalism is safe in Tory hands. Instead, in the politest possible terms, Indian politicians sent her home to think again.