Why not a race to the top instead of the bottom? What is the comparative "advantage," or sense, in competing to be the greater slave under the thumb of capital?

    In a smart and responsible trade regime – one fit for a still very disparate and undemocratic world - rifle-shot tariff adjustments are needed rather than a blunder buss, currency ruin, approach serving to destroy everyone’s wealth and raise the cost of imports. This not only cancels all previous "free" trade gains but does not guarantee any increase in exports… as we have already seen..

    Clearly, global companies can always get their global markets by producing and selling in many countries. The problem is with the tariff-free re-entry of goods and services into G7 countries – which then serve to undermine First World economies, wages, values, productive capacity, and subvert freedom itself. In general, there is little problem with tariff-less trade between G7 countries of proximately equal wages and social standards. But it is integration between First, Second and Third world countries, and global exploitation by multinationals, which needs intelligent, responsible, upward-moving, mediation and intelligent tariff application.

    True trade freedom, also meaning tariff freedom, will allow for more companies, competition, and innovation to remain and emerge as opposed to defaulting to a few global companies and global oligopoly – a sorry condition certain to mean greater prices, less competition, less diversity and innovation, and erase any and all the early benefits of trade. We might not have an American steel industry today but for Abraham Lincoln’s tariff on British steel, and President Bush’s recent moves. Are we to deny the same rational and responsible freedom to Indonesia, Egypt, for example?

    Despite the obvious problems and immense costs of so-called free trade, Capital’s stranglehold on media has made being a "protectionist" a kind of crime – this despite our having armies, police forces, and neighborhood watch programs for obvious reasons.

    In short, given a still very disparate and dangerous world, if you’re not a rational protectionist then you’re an irrational, irresponsible, and fascist Exposure-ist. This means you are willing to expose virtually every piece of freedom, wealth, and First World progress to evisceration and reward the greater slave masters for their superior exploitation of mankind and the environment.

    So you want to be an Exposure-ist?

    For reasons of democracy alone GATT-NAFTA needs to be re-opened. In fact, GATT-NAFTA came as a result of a virtual coup d’etat by capital. Legislation was passed in the dark of night, five days after the 1993 election in which this incredibly important topic was never mentioned, was buried in capital’s media, and passed with the help of 100 lame ducks in Congress - who, having just been un-elected, should never have agreed to vote on such an important topic. Moreover, polls then showed 87% of the people opposed NAFTA.

    The process itself was thus criminal. At the time, Ralph Nader tried to get members of Congress to answer 10 simple questions about what was in the trade treaty. Only one representative took him up on the test. When he failed, he changed his vote to No as a result. As for the 534 others, this monumental legislation was not even read, much less understood, by "our" own representatives – yet another crime.

    As the picture worsens, our own "labor" department quietly dropped its Corporate job-loss report recently since the dismal figures are too embarrassing and "our" companies need secrecy and protection from public opinion - all while they "restructure" and "outsource" our jobs offshore, only to drive us further into depression, deficit, and present us with a fait accompli.

    In an era of obscene CEO wages, Wall Street crime, Enron-style corporate misfeasance, and extorted labor forces, not only nations but our states as well are being bankrupted, drained of productive capacity, tax bases, and forced to pick up all the myriad costs at the same time. Today it is evident we need new ideas, and real democratic processes, in determining our trade policy.

Kent Welton,

TheCenterForBalance.org

 1  |  2  |  3