R.I.P. TTIP?

[malthaussen]

24. Well, how about a little philosophical advocatus diaboli...

... the philosophical question I see emerging from these mega-trade agreements is this: why is State rule superior to Corporate rule? We can stipulate, for the nonce, that the nation-state was a useful construct for a lot of years, although we must also acknowledge that we have to take a lot of bad with the good. Setting aside the demerits of such transnational trade agreements (which are pretty evident, IMO), isn't the biggest argument against them reducible to "I got mine, screw you?" in respect of the people of other nations? There is a strong element of isolationism in anti-trade arguments, whereas the con used to support them points out that, while people in Des Moines may have to adjust their standards of living downward, people in Shanghai are going to greatly improve theirs. Now, why should I, a resident of the suburbs of Philadelphia, care more about the people of Des Moines than the people of Shanghai? Because the latter are not "my kind?" Because the people of Des Moines, with none of whom I am personally acquainted, share with myself "allegiance" to some abstract notion that creates nothing so much as a self-perpetuating barrier between me and others? Which barrier, of course, provides a convenient excuse for us to exploit those others, and vice-versa, with the punch line being that the real beneficiaries are the ruling class in both states, who are laughing at me all the way to the bank.

No, gentle reader, I am not so naive as to believe the con, and I do understand that multinational trade agreements are designed to serve the ruling class (or, to put a finer point on it, the owning class), and that the small increase in standard of living for the residents of Shanghai is disproportionate to the depression in Des Moines, and to the profits for the corporations. What I suggest is that the arguments against such agreements typically perpetuate an obsolescent system which leads to much the same result as the proposed changes, in that the owning class will still derive obscene profit. The only difference I see is that I -- and possibly those in Des Moines, continue to be, if you will, "more better off" than those in Shanghai; and I suggest that this is not, ultimately, a particularly charitable rationale.

-- Mal