@ diptherio … & MRW … thanx for the links … from Canada i applaud Senator Elizabeth Warren’s principled position … and how refreshing it is to hear someone on the inside say that the American public’s opinion should set policy … hallelujah ! … & if i may share some of my thoughts … . I regard global neoliberal capitalist ideology as a threat. … And regarding the TPP, my sense is that neoliberal international trade policies do NOT respect people, and therefore cannot respect or take joy in celebrating global cultural pluralism. … You would rightly say … “Hey, … Wake-up dude, this is just a multi-national trade agreement.” … My response would be … ” Of coarse TPP is that, but it is also much more, like: politics, policies, regulations, implementation mechanisms, institutions, personnel, etc.. As you would agree. My thoughts and judgements originate from a mind-set which is a composite of different socioeconomic perspectives which are evolving as I learn more. … At the present time i lean heavily towards being a national protectionist supporting cultural pluralism, as well as a regulatory liberal who recognizes the importance of a principled independent non-captured sovereign, and representative government to regulate the market and its powerful monopolists. Hey, someone has to guide that ‘invisible hand’. … But somewhere down the post crisis river … I would hope that this global community might someday be the home to cosmopolitan liberals in a much more horizontal equal paradigm. . So the national protectionist would applaud sovereign nation states which are trying to protect and further their specific cultural heritage, and thereby resist the enormous pressure from global institutions pushing for technology-enabled, globally-managed trade regimes and agreements, creating a more homogeneous global culture to maximize market efficiency, … global branding. . I guess, analogous to the globalization of the ‘control society’ model , … enforced by aspects of the disciplinary society, wherein authoritarian oligarchs, try to resist change and limit discussion in order to further their intrenched hegemony. . In any case, going back to international trade agreements in the digital age at the beginning of the third millennium. … I know, there is quite a debate about whether national-protectionist sovereignty can co-exist with global neoliberalism. … I think at this stage they are mutually exclusive. … The ideological foundations of the neoliberal TPP agreement is market fundamentalism, or so it seems to me . So ideology, builds policy, which creates global institutions such as the WTO, IMF, WB, which support and legitimate the market fundamentalist neoliberal TPP investor-state resolution process . … To me the skeleton of the beast now has flesh but the gavel has yet to reach the mark . … . Let us remember that the force behind neoliberalism has been meticulously nurtured over many decades. The collective long-term ideological solidarity of the covert central power brokers, has been augmented by the effective use of disruptive technological advances to manage ‘their’ global economy, … confident that their political cover is solid, and protected by their captured political representatives. . This confidence, and i would suggest, this corporate collective arrogance, … is openly revealed when substantive discussions affecting global society, are held behind closed doors, as Senator Elizabeth Warren suggested. . This trend is not new, and of course is not limited to trade talks. … However, for me the distressing effect of this behavior, is that the act of overt exclusion further alienates civil society, building the perception that this illegitimate, unaccountable, non-representative corporate lobby is unstoppable, ever expanding, and not concerned. … . However, in terms of the TPP and previous multi-national trade agreements … the investor-state resolution process is appalling … and to my mind, clearly reflects the corporate elite’s brazen arrogance. … It has often been articulated that the decisions of this biased investor-state resolution process is just a way to circumvent and subvert national sovereignty … effectively enabling multi-national corporations to steal from the public’s purse, while giving the ‘finger’ to the nation state. … ! . Yes, some legitimate national protectionist sovereign governments try to negotiate exemption, … but at what cost. … After all, there is security in consensus and membership and it takes incredible leadership to resist the neoliberal globalization movement to further regional sovereign culture. Also, being a national protectionist isn’t cool in the eyes of the mass media. … But … Anyways. . Furthermore, in my opinion, the neoliberal ideology’s longevity is linked to the tactic of managing the narrative by restricting discussion to only corporate friendly dialogue. Issues are nuanced to direct the discussion to material consumer society, efficiency, and the ad-driven economy. … This is a very shallow dominant narrative driven home by mainstream commercial media … and one which ultimately will prove to be toxic to the global, pluralistic, socio-political economic bio-sphere. … Also the financialization of the economy and the growth of fictitious money trumps production and distribution which many of you here know so much about. … . Again, let’s look at the investor-state dispute resolution body in terms of their considered judgements. … In my opinion, this dispute resolution body is purposefully set up so as NOT to be able to semantically address moral/ethical/environmental/cultural, or other socio-political concerns, because those issues are outside its mandate. … O.K. … But, the problem with that is … the effects and liability pursuant from the actions of global trade and investments are externalized to civil society and the environment at large. . So, the investor-state resolution body’s mandate is to legitimate and facilitate ever expanding global markets, accompanied by the underlying assumption of infinite growth, … which in turn recognizes and limits the breadth of the narrative to highlighting the multi-national corporation’s fiduciary commitment to continually maximize the shareholder dividends. …( I’m in over my head here, and yes, a little information is a dangerous thing.) … continuing … . I would suggest that the investor-state panel is designed to render myopic arbitration decisions furthering only the multinational neoliberal-corporate market fundamentalist mind-set. … Sure, a captured congress or legislature may sign off on the agreement but the investor-state resolution panel’s decisions are made by members of the corporate revolving door club. … From the public sector’s perspective these decisions are often seen as a … ‘hit, grab, and run with the money’ occurrence. … . Do you think that TPP’s investor-state arbitration panel considers … global pluralism, civil society, the social contract, recognition of or even respect for the public interest and in the public good. And what about the environment ! These realms are outside the purview of TPP’s arbitration panel … and that’s the way those corporations and investors … interested in the only short-term maximization of money by, as David Harvey would say … accumulation by dispossession … want it. … The greedy are endlessly needy ! … . The global, supra-national, unaccountable, short-sighted, economically powerful monopolies, empowered by transformative disruptive technology need to get a ‘soul’, so that at least the elite persons within might have a sense some shame. ” Woe Dude, corporations don’t have souls ! … Chill ! “… O.K … . But in closing don’t yah think that … “The System” … is brilliantly designed to remove accountability, externalize liability, and set up plausible deniability. … all the best … phrase
Posted on: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 02:34:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015