You don't need to support it. What you don't have a right to do is to try to use the state to prohibit it. If you want to buy local, it's your prerogative, and there is nothing wrong with your choice. However, if your neighbor wants to buy from elsewhere, it's theirs as well, and this is valid for both buying bananas or engineer work.

Are you using "Your neighbour" as a way of saying "another member of your local labour pool"? It isn't obvious to me that there would be anybody rational in the local labour pool who would willingly argue in favour of reducing their earning potential through moving bargaining balance towards capital by globalizing labour competition.

I mean why should ANY worker want to make less and thus have lower standards of living. Just doesn't make much sense to me.

If they live in the United States they have a right to use the state to prohibit it. The First Amendment guarantees the right to petition the government for redress of grievances (whether real or perceived).

In the words of the Copley First Amendment Center, "People have the right to appeal to government in favor of or against policies that affect them or in which they feel strongly. This freedom includes the right to gather signatures in support of a cause and to lobby legislative bodies for or against legislation"

It might be lawful, but it isn't ethical. It's just legal plunder at its best.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_plunder

I'm assuming you mean the actions of the state are unethical and not the freedom of speech to petition the government