Bill Rosenberg wrote: > What approach should unions take to international trade and investment > agreements such as APEC, the WTO, MAI? > Fight 'em all the way. > There are two main approaches represented. > > The first is that of the ICFTU. I don't think I'm caricaturing it when > I summarise it by quoting from the last sentence of its booklet, > "Fighting For Worker's Human Rights in the Global Economy": "saving > the global economy; and creating a true global society". The > introduction to the booklet explains the rationale as wanting the > "potential of the expanding global market" but with "stronger rules to > ensure that core labour standards are universally observed in the new > global economy". > Let me write from a U.S. perspective. We cannot even control our own government. How the hell are we supposed to control the WTO, that has callously overlooked anything other than TRADE and PROFITS. With NAFTA, we got all sorts of promises of environmental and labor benefits. After it was enacted, nothing. The side agreements were nothing more than a joke. > The second is to struggle against the underlying principles of these > organisations, while acknowledging that international agreements are > necessary and (appropriate ones) desirable - but to control rather > than deregulate international trade and investment. > > There are associated debates on tactics - inside the tent vs outside > it etc. But that's not so much what I'm interested in views on. > > Bill > > Bill Rosenberg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
