Opposite to history, TPP is designed to STRENGTHEN (not weaken) monopolies [View all]

[Faryn Balyncd]

Historically, free trade agreements were designed to reduce or eliminate protective barriers (tariffs, in particular), which weakened monopolistic power by opening borders to trans-border competition.

But, as Paul Krugman has noted, there is already extensive trading between TPP nations as protective tariffs are largely already gone. Consequently, from a "free trade" perspective, the TPP is not a big deal, as virtual free trade is already a fait accompli.



So now, as everyone knows, "free trade agreements" are no longer about free trade.

It's a familiar pattern. Corporate interests have co-opted the process, utilizing the language of free trade, while using the largely secret negotiations to erect new walls to competition.

These new walls are primarily in the form of locking in corporate written interpretations & enhancements of intellectual property law (especially as preferred by Big Pharma, big AgriBusiness) and the outright subversion of popular sovereignty by the setting up (separate from established courts) of corporate designed arbitration panels which allow corporations to sue & financially cripple any pesky local or state government who would have the audacity to use its constitutional power & duty to protect the general welfare by passing appropriate environmental, worker protection, or safety regulations (or, in the case of the TPP, have the audacity to require labeling of food content such as GMO ingredients).

So we now live in a world of "Free Trade Agreements In Name Only", mockeries of language which, by strengthening rather than weakening corporate monopolies, have the opposite effect of historical, actual free trade, having been co-opted, twisted, and perverted by corporate interests.