3 ms·

Trade deals are by their nature multilateral. Try to do them democratically, and they simply won't get done: every country would propose amendments, each of whi

Trade deals are by their nature multilateral. Try to do them democratically, and they simply won't get done: every country would propose amendments, each of which would have to be ratified by every other country... It's reasonable to take issue with the contents of the TPP, but demanding a democratic open process would lead to no free trade deals at all

Analemma_ 10y ago
> demanding a democratic open process would lead to no free trade deals at all Sounds like a win-win.
shmerl 10y ago
> Trade deals are by their nature multilateral. The problem is, these deals aren't about trade, let alone about free one. They are about changing laws. And lawmaking hidden from the public is a very problematic idea. > Try to do them democratically, and they simply won't get done There is no need to make massive debates during development of these trade agreements. I agree, it can slow them down. But, they have to be done in public fashion, so when problems arise, they can be spotted right away and then criticized and fixed. That's something not just doable, but it was already practiced before. > It's reasonable to take issue with the contents of the TPP, but demanding a democratic open process would lead to no free trade deals at all You can't take an issue with it if: 1. you can't see it until it's too late. 2. there is no way to fix problems in it except axing the whole thing which is much much harder (fast track).
clickok 10y ago
I mean, I understand your perspective, but it's kinda bizarre. The line about gridlock making free trade deals impossible seems to be the standard response to every criticism of the incredibly secretive negotiation process, but it never gets followed to the logical conclusion. What is the point of having a democracy if the very principle of "rule by the people" gets subverted every time it presents an inconvenience? Perhaps having a democratic open process is worth missing out on one of these deals.

Analemma_ 10y ago

> demanding a democratic open process would lead to no free trade deals at all Sounds like a win-win.

shmerl 10y ago

> Trade deals are by their nature multilateral. The problem is, these deals aren't about trade, let alone about free one. They are about changing laws. And lawmaking hidden from the public is a very problematic idea. > Try to do them democratically, and they simply won't get done There is no need to make massive debates during development of these trade agreements. I agree, it can slow them down. But, they have to be done in public fashion, so when problems arise, they can be spotted right away and then criticized and fixed. That's something not just doable, but it was already practiced before. > It's reasonable to take issue with the contents of the TPP, but demanding a democratic open process would lead to no free trade deals at all You can't take an issue with it if: 1. you can't see it until it's too late. 2. there is no way to fix problems in it except axing the whole thing which is much much harder (fast track).

clickok 10y ago

I mean, I understand your perspective, but it's kinda bizarre. The line about gridlock making free trade deals impossible seems to be the standard response to every criticism of the incredibly secretive negotiation process, but it never gets followed to the logical conclusion. What is the point of having a democracy if the very principle of "rule by the people" gets subverted every time it presents an inconvenience? Perhaps having a democratic open process is worth missing out on one of these deals.