2016-09-17

#StopCetaTTIP #StopTISA #CETA #StopTTIP

I'm not at my desk today. Very early this morning, I headed out to do what little I could to make a difference. Today, I'm in Frankfurt am Main, demonstrating against the so-called "free-trade" agreements that our governments are trying to ram down our throats. We need to stop these -- all of them (there are no "good" ones) -- so today I would just like to remind you why:

  1. These agreements affect every single one of us, from the highest ranking politician to the highest paid CEO of an international corporation to the lowest paid employee in any of the countries involved in the agreement and all those citizens of those countries, including those not yet born. Any agreement that comprehensive can't be negotiated in secret, for it affects too many people. When so many people have so little to say about what happens to them, it is undemocratic at best, but subversive at worst.
  2. If, as we know these agreements foresee, extra-judicial, extra-political, extra-legal "courts" must be established that take precedence over the duly and democratically elected governments of the countries involved, then these agreements are additionally undemocratic and by definition partial to the negotiators and not those afflicted.
  3. There is no reasonable, let alone reliable, research that supports the claims regarding increased economic activity or numbers of jobs to be created. Any and every claim is nothing more than a statement, at best, a fraudulent depiction at worst, and should be rejected in either case.
  4. Agreements that favor large, multi-national corporations discriminate against and are antithetical to small, local companies (not only mom-and-pop organizations, but also small and mid-sized regionally active ones as well). In other words, such agreements discriminate against an established and desired class of businesses.
  5. Although touted as "free-trade" agreements, there is nothing in them (at least not as far as any of the leaked documentation regarding the agreement or the negotiations is concerned, that reflects free-market theory. You don't have to be a fan or advocate of Smith or Friedman to feel that your needs aren't being met here.
  6. The most fundamental assumptions underlying any such agreement are based on philosophies and economic theories that have no justification in or documented relevance to actual social and economic realities. (The neo-liberal assumption that all actors in all markets act out of "enlightened self-interest" has never been reasonably or convincingly demonstrated.) There is a serious disconnect between theory and reality.
  7. The frameworks that are to be established by such agreements derive from the assumption that governmental intervention in markets is undesirable, yet the benefactors of such intervention are the strongest supporters of such agreements for they have been assured that such interventions will continue once the agreements are in place. In other words, for them, they can't lose.
  8. Another underlying assumption of the agreement is that privatized undertakings are always more efficient than government-influenced undertakings, but there is not a shred of reliable evidence anywhere, worldwide, that supports the contention. In other words, the agreement is based and founded on premises that have no basis in reality.
  9. There are many other, time-tested and proven, ways to promote increased economic activity between entities. There is not just one way. There are alternatives.




All of these issues are known. In other words, they are the simple conclusions that can be drawn from the available documentation, the political discussion, and the factors that have been made public. It hasn't been easy to get this far, for the public discussion up until now has been thwarted by vicious propaganda, clouded by distractions and irrelevant side-discussions, and undermined by so-called experts who are taking part in the negotiations but who are unwilling to divulge necessary details.

If for no other reason, all of these so-called free-trade agreements should be rejected because of the negotiators' insistence upon secrecy. I don't care that education has been driving into the ground in recent decades. I don't care that "the public" is allegedly not well-informed enough to make a competent assessment of the agreement itself. Business and trade are not that complicated that even half-way reasonable individuals can't form an informed opinion about them. The fact that free-trade-agreement whistleblowers have been so aggressively pursued is reason enough to question the legitimacy of the agreements themselves. When one has to resort to such heavy-handed methods for a matter that is purportedly in all our best interest, I don't think it is unreasonable to conclude that perhaps the advocates aren't putting all their cards on the table. And if they aren't, I think it's more than reasonable to ask "why". And I haven't even begun to address the environmental, safety-standards, quality-standards, health, healthcare, or infrastructure issues, just to name the most obvious, but certainly not all of them, that need to be considered as well. The list goes on and on. There is truly not a single aspect of our lives not addressed in some way by these agreements, but we should trust that the negotiators are acting in all our best interests. It boggles the mind.

The mere notion of "secretly negotiated, free-trade agreements, which -- just to add a bit of spice to the discussion -- really not even need to be approved by the governments of the countries involved is, well, suspect. Upon what experience am I -- or anyone else -- supposed to base the voluntary acceptance of something so far reaching being negotiated by people with a proven track record of deception and misinformation?

Yes, that's what I thought. And that's exactly the reason I'm not at my desk, but rather on the streets, in Frankfurt, to give voice to and to make a statement against what is being imposed upon us against our collective will. There is a growing number of citizens who want to know more and deserve to be informed. There is a growing number of families who have questions that need to be answered. There is a growing number of individuals who doubt the veracity of the claims being made. There is a growing will in the citizenry that wants to be included in the democratic discussion that should be taking place. All of these things the supporters of the agreement would like to deny.

It is amazing, if not breath-taking, in this day and age that in light of the minimal information that has leaked to the public that non-participants can be in favor of such agreements. From all we know about what is involved, we have to ask ourselves upon what are the proponents basing their approval? Still, there are those who want to force these agreements through come what may. But, for my part, I can't see why they're necessary, nor can I see what advantages they are going to bring, nor can I just sit back and wait to see whether the supporters get their way at the expense of the rest of us.

I'm not at my desk today. Very early this morning, I headed out to do what little I could to make a difference. Today, I'm in Frankfurt am Main, demonstrating against the so-called "free-trade" agreements that our governments are trying to ram down our throats. We need to stop these -- all of them (there are no "good" ones). Our future, and the future of our children and grandchildren hang in the balance.

I have to do something other than just wait till it's too late.

No comments: