I hate this sort of article. One, because there's always far more nuance
to the case than the biased reporting, which wants to present a particular
side in line with its general narrative, allows, and two because even if
true, it's a tiny case against a much more significant good. It's
identical to when conservatives attack the EU over the chocolate or banana
directives. If you want to attack the WTO, do so on broad grounds, rather
than trying to convince people by hard cases such as this. Attack the
benefits that a country gains. Attack the ideal of completely free-trade
(that, of course, it is far from meeting, more's the pity). Don't try to
mislead people that it's all about cases such as this, or chocolate
directives.
Moreover, what's this love of democratic decision-making? Why is more
democracy always good? Why can't we say that a minimal threshold of
democracy is a good thing, such as the democratic right of US citizens to
pull out of the WTO if they wished, but beyond that it is more likely to
produce knee-jerk responses to cases such as this which get blown out of
proportion, rather than reflecting the more sober, long-term will of the
people?
The example I've always liked since I heard it is: what if there had been
a referendum on crime and punishment in the weeks following the Jamie
Bulger killing? What odds that the death penalty and god knows what other
unspeakable laws would have come onto the statute? The public cannot
possibly have access to even the most minimal amount of information
necessary to make an informed choice on something like the WTO,
particularly in an era of Fox news and generally confirmation-bias news
reporting (and seeking). That doesn't mean it is thus a bad thing. We can
either live in the real world of immense complication or else cry for an
ideal of perfectly reasonable citizens who spend their lives in study of
trade-law niceties. It's not going to happen. We have representative
democracy for that reason.
Best,
Mike
> More overriding of national sovereignty and democratic decision-making by
> the WTO:
>
> Public Citizen
>
> Eyes on Trade
>
> September 06, 2011
>
> "U.S. measures to reduce teenage smoking violate World Trade Organization
> (WTO) rules, according to a panel ruling released late last week.
> Indonesia successfully argued that the U.S. Family Smoking Prevention and
> Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) of 2009 violated WTO rules. The ruling opens
> the door to more teenage tobacco addiction, while further imperiling the
> legitimacy of a WTO that rules against environmental, health and other
> national policies 90 percent of the time."
>
> http://citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade/2011/09/wto-opens-door-to-teen-tobacco-addiction.html
>
>
>
> Dr Jon Cloke
> Lecturer/Research Associate
> Geography Department
> Loughborough University
> Loughborough LE11 3TU
>
> Office: 01509 228193
> Mob: 07984 813681
--
Michael Keary
PhD Candidate
Department of International Politics
Aberystwyth University
+44 (0) 1970 623111 ext 4185
|