3 ms·
The issue people are failing to see, is that usually, countries are negotiating against each other, for their own perceived interest. The much valued "rule of l
by jokoon 10y ago
The issue people are failing to see, is that usually, countries are negotiating against each other, for their own perceived interest. The much valued "rule of law" only applies within countries, not internationally. There are no "international law" for trade.
So it's a murky situation from the beginning. I think the TTIP is an attempt to have a common ground to end up with something instead of nothing. Of course there are huge interests at stake here, and I want to be the devil's advocate for once to try and understand the real philosophy of the treaty without the cynicism and a more strategic view in mind.
- izacus 10y ago> So it's a murky situation from the beginning. I think the TTIP is an attempt to have a common ground to end up with something instead of nothing. That's the standard rationalization we've been fed form EU comission as well. But when that "something" means that we give up on our EU consumer protection laws to benefit american corporate profits it's actively harmful and against the values of people actually living in EU.
- witty_username 10y ago> our EU consumer protection laws to benefit american corporate profits it's actively harmful Could you elaborate on why it's actively harmful? Also, what does actively harmful mean? What is the difference between actively and passively harmful? > values of people actually living in EU. People vote for representatives who vote for/against the TTIP.