5 ms·

I see the TPP as part of the obsolescence of the nation state in favor of global corporate governance. The incompetence you mention fits in with this-- those bo

by api 11y ago

I see the TPP as part of the obsolescence of the nation state in favor of global corporate governance. The incompetence you mention fits in with this-- those boobs are just leftovers from the old system. The fact that Donald Trump is being seriously considered for president should tell you that the nation state is dead. Not saying this is a good thing. Read any 80s cyberpunk novel to see what's coming. William Gibson was a prophet.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
The fact that Donald Trump is being seriously considered for president should tell you that the nation state is dead. It doesn't tell me that at all.
- insanity55 11y ago
  go on...
  - striking 11y ago
    It means people are so tired of listening to self-interested politicians toe the party line that they're willing to elect a candidate solely based on how crazy his ideas are and how much he won't backpedal on them, even in the face of adversity. In terms of fearless leaders, he definitely is one. Of course, I also think his ideas are mostly inane and that within fifteen minutes of his inauguration he would have already started World War III. But I can understand why people want to elect him.
    - laichzeit0 11y ago
      Excuse my ignorance as I'm not American and perhaps miss all the nuances. - Wants to stop illegal immigration. Not immigration. Only illegal. i.e. people not paying taxes but living there undocumented - Non-citizens giving birth in USA and then automatically the baby is USA's problem until it dies - Tax reform that wants to stop corporate inversion and bring money back to USA (Google, Apple, etc.) - Wants a more competitive health care system than Obamacare - Wants USA to make better trade deals because there are crazy trade deficits. Why are any of these ideas seen as being crazy by Americans?
      - Natanael_L 11y ago
        Because of the how and why
      - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
        The second is a result of the United States being based on the principle of jus soli, as opposed to the more common jus sanguinis. It's not some incidental issue. Resolving it would mean completely overhauling what American identity is.
      - cpmsmith 11y ago
        First off, I'm not American either. It's crazy because you've just given the entire substance of his campaign. He hasn't actually given any more details than that, and the points are ostensibly chosen because they're easily latched onto by people who can't be bothered to pay very much attention. Also the wall thing.
        laichzeit0 11y ago
        But I don't see anyone on the internet writing articles rebutting any of the points. I.e. I'd expect someone to write an article where they negate each point on that list e.g. "Illegal immigration - I think Trump is crazy to bring this point up because there is nothing wrong with illegal immigration. The reason we should not be against illegal immigration is because ..." and so on and so on, for each point. The wall is an implementation detail. I see people focus on that but then it's almost like they're trying to avoid the topic. Trump seems like a very pragmatic reasoner. Keeps things simple. His way of reasoning seems to go something like this: "Illegal immigration. Are you for it, or against it? Against it? Ok. Would a wall help? Yes or no. Yes? Ok but you seem apprehensive about it. Why are you apprehensive? It's going to be expensive? We have a trade deficit with Mexico. I bet I could force them to pay for it by using strong arm tactics and adding taxes onto things they like exporting here. I'm good at negotating shit like that. Are you still apprehensive?" And so on. I just simply can't find any coherently written rebuttals other than articles that go "Trump is crazy. He's an narcissist. He's a racist" basically just ad hominems. No one is being critical about any of his points. So it's very weird when I see all the hostility against him but no actual counter arguments.
    - api 11y ago
      I think his election would result in... nothing. No change at all. The office is almost a chair warmer position at this point.
  - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
    See Jon Gnarr, who started an openly satirical joke political party in Iceland called the Best Party, but actually ended up winning the mayoral post of Reykjavik. At which point the Best Party became a serious effort. Nation state fully intact. Donald Trump is far less dramatic and just another cookie cutter populist.
walterbell 11y ago
Corporate lawsuits against governments at the World Bank (ISDS) can offer data on the balance of power between states and corporations. See this Aussie explainer video, in the style of the Daily Show: https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU More at http://www.isdscorporateattacks.org http://www.isdscorporateattacks.org & https://icsid.worldbank.org https://icsid.worldbank.org Water: Azurix v. Argentina Investor win (awarded $165 million plus interest) Ban of toxic fuel additive: Ethyl v. Canada Case settled (investor received $13 million, ban reversed) Toxic waste: Metalclad v. Mexico Investor win (awarded $16.2 million) Too-big-to-fail: Saluka v. Czech Republic Investor win (awarded $236 million)
- yrro 11y ago
  This is incredible. Reading the details of the cases listed on that site makes me feel sick. And there is absolutely nothing I can do about it.
  - walterbell 11y ago
    Those pre-TPP cases are nothing compared to the future combined scope of TPP (Pacific), TTIP (Europe) and RCEP (China, Korea, India, and other Asian countries). Never say there is nothing you can do. Tell other people about ISDS. Share the videos [1][2][3][4]. Jon Oliver's video [4] about the Philip Morris tobacco ISDS lawsuit against Australia (for brown paper packaging) caused such an outcry that TPP negotiators were forced to exclude the entire tobacco industry from ISDS. This is the first time such an industry-specific carve-out has appeared in a trade agreement. [1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=M9ZFDpuiFUs https://youtube.com/watch?v=M9ZFDpuiFUs [2] https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU [3] https://youtube.com/watch?v=AABOIcXZZwg https://youtube.com/watch?v=AABOIcXZZwg [4] https://youtube.com/watch?v=6UsHHOCH4q8 https://youtube.com/watch?v=6UsHHOCH4q8
    - yrro 11y ago
      Whenever I think about this for more than a passing moment I just become so scared and angry. How the fuck is a company able to take a country to court over a public health measure? Who the fuck voted for the evil bastards who made that possible? How do they fucking live with themselves?
iamadam 11y ago
The nation state is dead unless Donald Trump manages to pull off a victory.
- NhanH 11y ago
  Yep, I don't know what Trump will lead US into (and I don't think it will necessary be worse than any other president in this day and age). But any mainstream candidate from GOP or Democrat will certainly lead to more TPP.
  - unclebucknasty 11y ago
    It doesn't much matter who is in the role, as it is exactly that: a role. Even without conspiracy theories regarding secret cabals that rule the world from the shadows, there is overwhelming inertia baked into the system itself. A fairly recent study that I very vaguely recall pointed to this fact: the conclusion being that it is extraordinarily difficult to effect change within systems that are essentially self-perpetuating.
- striking 11y ago
  Or Bernie Sanders. They're both creative individuals that are willing to buck the trend and change things in the way they think is right rather than toeing the party line.
  - NhanH 11y ago
    No they are not: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stop-comparing-donald-trump-and-bernie-sanders/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stop-comparing-donald-tr... Notably #6 in the article.
    - striking 11y ago
      So Sanders gets less attention and is campaigning based on the facts rather than his personality. But although he tends to vote the same as many other Democrats, he is very dangerous to moneyed interests in politics. No one's bothered to fix that for a long time.

by api 11y ago

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

The fact that Donald Trump is being seriously considered for president should tell you that the nation state is dead. It doesn't tell me that at all.

insanity55 11y ago
go on...
- striking 11y ago
  It means people are so tired of listening to self-interested politicians toe the party line that they're willing to elect a candidate solely based on how crazy his ideas are and how much he won't backpedal on them, even in the face of adversity. In terms of fearless leaders, he definitely is one. Of course, I also think his ideas are mostly inane and that within fifteen minutes of his inauguration he would have already started World War III. But I can understand why people want to elect him.
  - laichzeit0 11y ago
    Excuse my ignorance as I'm not American and perhaps miss all the nuances. - Wants to stop illegal immigration. Not immigration. Only illegal. i.e. people not paying taxes but living there undocumented - Non-citizens giving birth in USA and then automatically the baby is USA's problem until it dies - Tax reform that wants to stop corporate inversion and bring money back to USA (Google, Apple, etc.) - Wants a more competitive health care system than Obamacare - Wants USA to make better trade deals because there are crazy trade deficits. Why are any of these ideas seen as being crazy by Americans?
    - Natanael_L 11y ago
      Because of the how and why
    - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
      The second is a result of the United States being based on the principle of jus soli, as opposed to the more common jus sanguinis. It's not some incidental issue. Resolving it would mean completely overhauling what American identity is.
    - cpmsmith 11y ago
      First off, I'm not American either. It's crazy because you've just given the entire substance of his campaign. He hasn't actually given any more details than that, and the points are ostensibly chosen because they're easily latched onto by people who can't be bothered to pay very much attention. Also the wall thing.
      - laichzeit0 11y ago
        But I don't see anyone on the internet writing articles rebutting any of the points. I.e. I'd expect someone to write an article where they negate each point on that list e.g. "Illegal immigration - I think Trump is crazy to bring this point up because there is nothing wrong with illegal immigration. The reason we should not be against illegal immigration is because ..." and so on and so on, for each point. The wall is an implementation detail. I see people focus on that but then it's almost like they're trying to avoid the topic. Trump seems like a very pragmatic reasoner. Keeps things simple. His way of reasoning seems to go something like this: "Illegal immigration. Are you for it, or against it? Against it? Ok. Would a wall help? Yes or no. Yes? Ok but you seem apprehensive about it. Why are you apprehensive? It's going to be expensive? We have a trade deficit with Mexico. I bet I could force them to pay for it by using strong arm tactics and adding taxes onto things they like exporting here. I'm good at negotating shit like that. Are you still apprehensive?" And so on. I just simply can't find any coherently written rebuttals other than articles that go "Trump is crazy. He's an narcissist. He's a racist" basically just ad hominems. No one is being critical about any of his points. So it's very weird when I see all the hostility against him but no actual counter arguments.
  - api 11y ago
    I think his election would result in... nothing. No change at all. The office is almost a chair warmer position at this point.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  See Jon Gnarr, who started an openly satirical joke political party in Iceland called the Best Party, but actually ended up winning the mayoral post of Reykjavik. At which point the Best Party became a serious effort. Nation state fully intact. Donald Trump is far less dramatic and just another cookie cutter populist.

walterbell 11y ago

Corporate lawsuits against governments at the World Bank (ISDS) can offer data on the balance of power between states and corporations. See this Aussie explainer video, in the style of the Daily Show: https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU More at http://www.isdscorporateattacks.org http://www.isdscorporateattacks.org & https://icsid.worldbank.org https://icsid.worldbank.org Water: Azurix v. Argentina Investor win (awarded $165 million plus interest) Ban of toxic fuel additive: Ethyl v. Canada Case settled (investor received $13 million, ban reversed) Toxic waste: Metalclad v. Mexico Investor win (awarded $16.2 million) Too-big-to-fail: Saluka v. Czech Republic Investor win (awarded $236 million)

yrro 11y ago
This is incredible. Reading the details of the cases listed on that site makes me feel sick. And there is absolutely nothing I can do about it.
- walterbell 11y ago
  Those pre-TPP cases are nothing compared to the future combined scope of TPP (Pacific), TTIP (Europe) and RCEP (China, Korea, India, and other Asian countries). Never say there is nothing you can do. Tell other people about ISDS. Share the videos [1][2][3][4]. Jon Oliver's video [4] about the Philip Morris tobacco ISDS lawsuit against Australia (for brown paper packaging) caused such an outcry that TPP negotiators were forced to exclude the entire tobacco industry from ISDS. This is the first time such an industry-specific carve-out has appeared in a trade agreement. [1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=M9ZFDpuiFUs https://youtube.com/watch?v=M9ZFDpuiFUs [2] https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU https://youtube.com/watch?v=M4-mlGRPmkU [3] https://youtube.com/watch?v=AABOIcXZZwg https://youtube.com/watch?v=AABOIcXZZwg [4] https://youtube.com/watch?v=6UsHHOCH4q8 https://youtube.com/watch?v=6UsHHOCH4q8
  - yrro 11y ago
    Whenever I think about this for more than a passing moment I just become so scared and angry. How the fuck is a company able to take a country to court over a public health measure? Who the fuck voted for the evil bastards who made that possible? How do they fucking live with themselves?

iamadam 11y ago

The nation state is dead unless Donald Trump manages to pull off a victory.

NhanH 11y ago
Yep, I don't know what Trump will lead US into (and I don't think it will necessary be worse than any other president in this day and age). But any mainstream candidate from GOP or Democrat will certainly lead to more TPP.
- unclebucknasty 11y ago
  It doesn't much matter who is in the role, as it is exactly that: a role. Even without conspiracy theories regarding secret cabals that rule the world from the shadows, there is overwhelming inertia baked into the system itself. A fairly recent study that I very vaguely recall pointed to this fact: the conclusion being that it is extraordinarily difficult to effect change within systems that are essentially self-perpetuating.
striking 11y ago
Or Bernie Sanders. They're both creative individuals that are willing to buck the trend and change things in the way they think is right rather than toeing the party line.
- NhanH 11y ago
  No they are not: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stop-comparing-donald-trump-and-bernie-sanders/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stop-comparing-donald-tr... Notably #6 in the article.
  - striking 11y ago
    So Sanders gets less attention and is campaigning based on the facts rather than his personality. But although he tends to vote the same as many other Democrats, he is very dangerous to moneyed interests in politics. No one's bothered to fix that for a long time.