-Caveat Lector- -------- Original Message -------- Subject: It's called SPIN. Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 00:52:28 -0500 From: Nurev Ind Research <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Organization: Nurev Independent Research BCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Misdirection. That's what a trickster does when he doesn't want you to notice what's REALLY going on. Many in Seattle want to get rid of the WTO altogether. It's illegal and undemocratic as well as tyrannical. Beware of those who try to convince you that tweaking the WTO will make it good for everybody. Chomsky calls this - setting the limits of acceptable discussion. Here below is a good example. Joshua2 ======== Philadelphia Inquirer December 3, 1999 Protesters have a point on WTO: Interest groups need to be heard By G. Richard Shell It is tempting to simply dismiss the protests of angry environmentalists, labor groups, and animal-rights advocates now being heard in Seattle against the World Trade Organization (WTO). After all, we live in an era of unprecedented growth and prosperity made possible in part by liberal trading rules. These protesters look like a group of Vietnam-era Yippies stuck in a time warp. Let's get on to another round of trade talks. But before turning the channel, let's look below the surface of these protests. What are these people upset about? Trade, itself? Not really. Most of them probably drove to Seattle in Japanese cars, are wearing "Made in China" running shoes and will happily sip Brazilian coffee at Seattle coffee bars. Most of these protesters are neither "back-to-nature" or "made-in-the-U.S.A." freaks. What frustrates them is *** the loss of their ability to participate in decision-making over trade issues - to bargain and negotiate as interest groups in an open and democratic political process.*** They have a serious point that may get lost in the media circus. Just what is the WTO? It is a treaty organization - a "contract" among sovereign states to abide by various free trade rules. How does it work? Basically, the WTO acts as a legal shield protecting national political leaders from domestic political forces seeking to impose protectionist laws. When free trade causes pain and domestic economic dislocation (and it often does), the people in pain naturally try to pass laws outlawing the low-cost imports that are disrupting their industries. When this happens, national political leaders can point to their WTO treaty obligation prohibiting protectionist laws. If the protectionist political forces are still not satisfied, the political leaders file a lawsuit at the WTO against the country causing the pain. When the lawsuit fails (as most do), these politicians can blame the "faceless bureaucrats in Geneva" for the domestic problems. That is the good side of the WTO: It enables national political leaders to promote economic growth by declaring protectionism to be "illegal" and giving aggrieved countries a place to sue other countries when the local political heat gets turned up too high. The problem most of the Seattle protesters are worried about, however, is not protectionism. They are worried about the WTO's bad side. The WTO "contract" covers economic issues only. Other global priorities such as human rights, personal freedoms and environmental needs simply have no place there. When a business leader in America wants to reform a U.S. law to relax pollution rules, he or she must answer the challenges of interest groups arrayed to protect the environment. But when a Japanese multinational gets its government to challenge that same U.S. environmental law in a WTO proceeding as a barrier to Japanese imports, the WTO decides the case (and may overrule the U.S. law) without a single interest group voice being raised on behalf of environmental concerns. The same silence echoes within the WTO complex in Geneva regarding issues of food safety, child-labor standards and a host of other public policies. Thus, by signing onto the WTO treaty, a country's leaders help promote free trade - a worthy goal. But the WTO system also bypasses the democratic processes that lead to non-protectionist environmental laws, child-labor statutes and the like. When virtually any domestic law comes into conflict with free-trade values, the WTO treaty documents mandate that the free-trade values must prevail. What's more, the only parties allowed to participate in the WTO policy-making and dispute settlement systems are the states themselves. No domestic or global interest group can appear, make an argument or even offer a suggestion. It is a closed system that recognizes free trade and only free trade as the preeminent norm. So before we write off these latter-day Yippies in Seattle, let's consider that they may have a point. There needs to be a better way for the WTO to recognize when legitimate, non-protectionist national values about things such as the environment and human rights conflict with free-trade rules. And we need to democratize the processes the WTO uses to discuss and debate these conflicts at the global level. Free trade is good, but it serves us only as a means to an end - freedom and democracy. It is not an end in itself. G. Richard Shell is professor of legal studies and management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He teaches a course on law, politics and business at Wharton and has written articles about the World Trade Organization legal system. ======================================== So when this clown says... " There needs to be a better way for the WTO to recognize when legitimate,*non-protectionist* national values about things such as the environment and human rights conflict with free-trade rules...," he sets the limits of legitimate discussion by making protectionism a non possibility. Only * non-Protectionist* national values are acceptable. Protectionism itself is not. This nonsense isn't even logical since protectionism is BY DEFINITION the ultimate national value in trade. It protects the sovereign country's producers, markets, and economy. Joshua2 DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
