(On topic) TTIP: Corporatocracy in action

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

In the recent years, we've been hearing increasingly frequently various calls for further integration of the "developed" world in its attempts to counter the emerging markets, some of which have already attained quite solid geostrategic positions in the last few decades. One of the major efforts in that direction is the preparation for the signing of the so called Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the US and EU, whose purpose is to finalize the unification of the economic space at the two sides of the Atlantic.

Many are concerned that the so called "Partnership" is an attempt by the Bigger Bro to get unlimited access to the European markets, in the conditions of a halved overall consumption on both sides of the Atlantic, the production capacities of just one of the two "partners" being fully capable to meet the combined demand of the new trade entity. Given the full subordination and timidity of the Brussels elites, the dropping energy prices and the lower tax burden on producers at the western side of the Big Water, I suppose you've already guessed which of the two partners will have by far the greater benefit from a trade agreement in the presently proposed form.

Today, as Europe has started realizing what this is actually all about, in some parts a powerful backlash against proceeding with the negotiation process has begun, an increasing part of Europe growing discontent with the prospect of being turned into a mere resource appendix to the powerful US mega-corporations, and a market where they could easily dump their produce.

Taken on its own, the treaty is dedicated to mutual lowering of the barriers to market penetration and product realization, as well as decreasing the scope of regulation within the respective countries involved. Which is fine. The problem is, there has been so much lobbyist activity surrounding these negotiations that in result, the European public has started sniffing the stinky smell of dishonesty all around the future fate of the weaker of the two sides - and is feeling increasingly nauseated by it. Especially after some cracks have appeared in the secrecy of these negotiations, and the public has finally been able to acquaint itself with the true depth and scope of the planned takeover.

The European Commission is already proposing to add a Cooperation Council to the TTIP, which could ensure proper regulation - but that also poses the threat that the already existing EU regulations could be subject to various backstage negotiations, readjustments, reviews and outright bargaining, without the involvement of the so called "democratic control" and oversight, which Europe likes to think it is enjoying.

Such sort of "mutual standard harmonization" and "cutting the non-tariff barriers", etc, means that the EU would have to adopt the US standards in many areas, including on the questions of essential goods and agriculture. In reality, here we're talking of an expansion of the US GMO producers into the EU markets, something the EU has been able to resist for the most part so far - despite all the hysterical lobbyism from across the Pond. What's more, the companies investing in Europe will be allowed to bypass the local courts on those aspects that they deem necessary, thus rendering the particularly inconvenient laws of public health, ecological and social security and many others irrelevant to their bottom-line, namely: profit. In turn, the European companies investing in the US will theoretically have the same privileges, but you may imagine why that "advantage" isn't being met with a lot of enthusiasm by the EU public - especially given the unequal status of the two sides of the proposal.

Some of the most candid analysts are already directly speaking of the TTIP's function as a tool that would ensure a mandate for open corporate plunder, through bypassing the democratic procedures and through the inevitable erosion of the civil rights of ordinary citizens, and the dismantling of national sovereignty. They argue that the treaty is a de facto program for privatization, which would fortify the privileged position of the most powerful global transnational corporations at the expense of ordinary non-billionaire people.

Practically, such a treaty would ensure a long-time lowering of the efficiency of national states, erase any chances for opposing or competing with the major corporations, for the sake of guaranteed profit for the latter - an effect that economists have been warning about for ages. In this case, we're not talking of the outdated form of traditional lobbyism, but of a direct (as opposed to concealed) integration between corporations and states, between business and bureaucracy - and ultimately, the birth of something completely new. And as we know, (to Godwin this a little bit), the merging of state power with big business is an essential feature of a fascist economy. Only, this time global.

Of course, the details of that new form of corporate/state power are yet to be finely tuned. But we should also note that this process appears to be natural, given the already existing reality of mutual transformation and interaction between big money and big power. In other words, the EU is about to again become the testing ground for a new social system that, at least in terms of scope, is different from much of what has existed until now throughout history (although some parallels with the age of the various West India companies is obviously yelling into our faces). Ultimately, the losing ones will again be you, me, everyone who isn't in the 1% of the 1%.

There's discontent brewing, and it could send quite a few heads rolling downhill in Brussels. This could become the straw that'd break the camel's back. Unless people turn out to be too preoccupied with their everyday nonsense to even notice it.

Comments

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Well, our country has been ruled from Brussels and Washington for quite a while, so we're not exactly unfamiliar with all this. Our prime minister first consults with the powdered poodles in Brussels or the businessmen-in-chief at the US embassy before taking any major decision, and in the rare occasions when he and his ministers dare to take a decision without consulting with either of the two, they soon get a phone call, and then start to backpedal pretty quickly.

The only exception (so far) has been the ambassador's fierce lobbying on behalf of Monsanto to allow GMO seeds here - first the PM was prepared to submit to his demands behind the backs of the people, but then he caved in under the popular pressure, and things are still pending on that front.

[unnamed525.livejournal.com]

How dare you contradict your corporate masters?

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Please don't sell my bodily fluids!

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

OK, people are disillusioned, but that won't make any difference. The EU is completely dependent on the US and will budge in the end. And the huge macroeconomic disproportions will deepen.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

It is pretty bad.
And all the protests in the world aren't likely to stop it.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

People have become too complacent to go anywhere beyond some waving of protest signs for a few days and then returning to the "ordinary routine". The constant encroachment upon democracy is happening so gradually that it's either not being noticed, or is being taken as something "normal" as of now.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Maybe the American gun-crazy tinfoil-hat wearing folk have a point, after all.

Jeez, did I say that aloud?

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

This isn't so much about the US vs EU market, as it's about supranational corporations getting a firmer grip over global markets. These have transcended national borders a long time ago. As the other graphs from the same source (http://corporateeurope.org/pressreleases/2014/07/agribusiness-biggest-lobbyist-eu-us-trade-deal-new-research-reveals) that you used for your graph are showing, many of the major lobbyist groups that are pushing for the TTIP in fact originate from European business circles (like the automobile industry for example).

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

True. And many of those supra-national companies are resident in Ireland, Luxemburg, Lichtenstein, the Channel Isles, or the IoM for tax purposes too.

We are making a wonderful world. Or allowing it to be made for us. Aren't we the lucky ones?

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

Whatever happens, the world is still way better than, say, 100 or 200 years ago. In fact, it may be better than at any given point in the past.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

At the moment...but we do appear to be in a window: one that may be closing due to climate change, political instability, burgeoning religious fundamentalism, disease, and human greed. And I'd also wager that "better" is pretty regionally qualified. For example, antibiotic resistance may return to us unpleasantnesses we haven't seen in ages. And this is down to commercial as much as individual misuse. Thus far we are keeping ahead of the evolving situations. Fingers crossed it remains so. But TTIP's particular take on Globalisation may prove to be antithetical to dealing with at least some of the problems mentioned, especially if the solutions to those problems go against commercial interests as expressed in TTIP.
As is, it appears that George Osborne has been preparing the NHS for full privatisation when TTIP arrives. I don't think that will go down especially well with folk here, but it should make a few individuals an awful lot of money. I'd guess the thing to do is to be one of those individuals.
As usual, I hope I'm wrong.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Naw, we've pretty much always been on the precipice of disaster. A while ago it was nuclear war and over population. Just recently, we were about to run out of oil. Despite this, things have a good record of getting better, way better actually in my neck of the woods. We certainly are a glass half empty species, despite having a pretty good run.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Some of us want more than just "a good run". Which is why we conserve. And why we don't approve of manifest stupidities like the link below.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/22/eu-dropped-pesticide-laws-due-to-us-pressure-over-ttip-documents-reveal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/22/eu-dropped-pesticide-laws-due-to-us-pressure-over-ttip-documents-reveal)

Now, that is the EU bending over backwards because of a perception. Allegedly no pressure was brought to bear on the EU negotiators, despite this part of TTIP being in direct contravention of numerous EU bans and rules.

The main problem is that the US, as the single major player, has sold its body politic to business, in the way two centuries previously the UK did. Lobbying is out of hand if it can influence these sort of deals. And the multinationals, states unto themselves, wield their power through lobbying.

It is now becoming apparent that China is the only world power who may actually manage a draw in the economic and diplomatic interaction between multinationals and their client-states. I'm beginning to wish I were Chinese...but only slightly. :)

[telemann.livejournal.com]

We certainly are a glass half empty species, despite having a pretty good run.

Not so much, human psychology shows the exact opposite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overconfidence_effect), humans are very prone to having a blind optimism that can quite detrimental.

It's discussed a bit on Through the wormhole with Morgan Freeman:Is Reality Real? specifically around 25:00 time stamp, but the entire episode is pretty good.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

I adore this show.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Ja, me too. the new season started up a few weeks ago.

S6E1: Are we all bigots?
S6E2: Can time go backwards?
S6E3: Are we here for a reason

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

Agh, I completely missed that!

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

That's a slightly different thing. For example, I'm sure many people were 100% confident that Y2K was going to leave us in the stone age or that 2012 would bring us a disaster. There is certainly room to be overconfident in your opinions but still overly pessimistic about our future.

Thanks for the vid, I'll check out the show once I'm back on the real internet.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

As another example:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/22/eu-dropped-pesticide-laws-due-to-us-pressure-over-ttip-documents-reveal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/22/eu-dropped-pesticide-laws-due-to-us-pressure-over-ttip-documents-reveal)

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

This is bad. This is fucking bad. I fucking hate these guys. Fuck them in the ass with a rusty razorblade.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Don't most of us?

Not that it will make a blind bit of difference.

As for torture...I sympathise with the desire...but I am, like you are, better than that. But it is a fine rhetoric flourish, nevertheless.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I don't care. I just want them to suffer.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

They may yet come to see their children and grandchildren die of their stupidity. And it will be entirely self-inflicted: it won't require revolution or bloody carnage. It will just require a buildup of the residues of the poisons we throw around with such abandon.

Just wait, there will be all sorts of new and interesting cancers for the medics to study. Not only are these wonderful folk providing us with poisoned food, they are giving academic medicos all sorts of educational possibilities. Just think of the Nobel Prizes...

I wouldn't wish their short-sightedness on anyone, nor their meanness of spirit, nor their greed. Like the Pharisee I say I am happier with my sins than with theirs.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but why should my children suffer as a collateral?

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Or mine.

But when do vassals have a choice? Especially when they have stupid overlords. The great corporations will own our lives, and already do to some extent.

I think I prefer the democratic ideal myself, rather than the present situation (apocalyptic late capitalism) which IIRC was a thesis in Marx's Hegelian idea of the evolution of political history. Oh well, as slaves vassals clients of the multinationals, we can still think and speak for ourselves: but it is still best not to cheek the master.

Bah. Corporations are not people, they are Aristos...above the law. They have a more privileged existence than any King...and they only die when they are taken over, or bankrupted. Then new ones fill their place.

This is about the privilege which accrues to trade.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I speak as a gentleman, not a player, which in my case means I have old-fashioned Aristos as chums and family: most of them are like you and me, relatively helpless against the whims of the megacorporations when it comes to what goes into the food chain, unless they live completely off the home farm.

This affects us all. From the castle to the semi in Ruislip to the housing estate in Bradford: in Munich and Berlin, in Paris and Marseille. And our political structure doesn't allow us a voice in the process. And we have done this to ourselves...or our politicians have done it to us under the behest of the agro-chemical combines, via K-Street. And of course the agro-chemical combines will try it on, but that is what political power should be able to thwart.

Dammit, not in this reality, alas.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

All the veiled and worthless accusations of "exaggerated rhetoric" aside, the fact is, if the TTIP is adopted in its proposed form, that'd mean the end of the European political model and quality of life, which are protected by the legislation adopted by the European parliament and the respective national parliaments. It'll practically totally erode the democratic foundations of the European societies, because any law that's adopted by the politicians in the interest of the people will be successfully challenged by the private "arbitrage courts" of the large corporations, whose interests would often be at odds with those of society at large.

The only argument of the US government and the EC for the adoption of the TTIP is that it'd guarantee economic growth at both sides of the Atlantic, but even that is questionable. Some estimates by the EC show that the EU's GDP would only grow by a meager half a per cent by 2027. Btw, even that number is contested by a number of independent experts, who believe it's "grossly exaggerated".

That's why the current debate on the TTIP is of enormous importance for Europe's future. So it's very alarming that this question isn't anywhere near being the most important question on the agenda, and in the rare occasions when it's being discussed, it's done very one-sidedly. Which by the way is quite telling of how immature the political elite is, and how disconnected society is from the political processes. People aren't even having the debate they should be having, what's left for making informed decisions on the issues that'd affect their lives for many years ahead. It's all too depressing, and unfortunately I don't see things getting better before they've gotten much worse.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Sometimes one needs specific, simple narratives to get the point across, and then, like buses, suddenly three come at once.

And the broadest appeal possible is always the best way of making the issues relatively apolitical. Folk don't want to appear anti-business. And for once, common claim can be made in that many aspects of TTIP will affect us all in non-trivial ways, though this may not be enough to change the way we are negotiating Tee-Tip, as they call it in the higher echelons of the Civil Service.

Depends who you think you're writing for, or what you are trying to say.