Dow's Digest: "Free Trade" vs. The Nation State

"Free Trade" vs. The Nation-State

Darrell Dow

During the past year as George Bush and Albert Gore crisscrossed the country campaigning to become First Pharmacist, our already puerile political dialogue continued to degenerate into further insipidness and tedium. Perhaps Dr. Bush will induce a compliant and comatose Congress to include artificial stimulants in his upcoming prescription drug plan in an effort to stir the slumbering populace from a campaign-induced stupor. Surely there was a decrease in Sominex and Nytol sales as the campaign progressed.

According to the Vanishing Voter Project conducted by the Shorenstein Center, only 36% of Americans paid close attention to the presidential race. And who can blame them? In an era of surface prosperity and mythical budget surpluses, free-lunch politics is the order of the day. Both candidates made promises that will bankrupt the next generation, bribing voters with their own money and pitting one group against another while ignoring issues like trade, immigration, and foreign policy that define our collective national destiny.

Take trade for example. While the leaders of both parties show increasing support for a policy of trade uber alles, the Institute for Policy Studies found that a majority of voters (83%) want policymakers to consider goals--protecting workers, the environment, and American sovereignty--even if this means slowing the growth of the economy.

Politicians from both parties, the architects of NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and PNTR for China, have joined hands with their corporate benefactors and media handmaidens to impose "free trade" policies even as the U.S. racks up a $300 billion merchandise trade deficit. While the stock market has soared to dizzying and unprecedented heights, at least until recently, our industrial base continues to erode as manufacturing jobs move overseas and factories close. America was once an industrial juggernaut, but today manufacturing jobs comprise the smallest share of the labor force in over a century. Even while record numbers of Americans have joined the workforce and work more hours than ever, median family income has been virtually stagnant since the early 1970's.

Though free trade has been a boon to many, it has not always benefited our countrymen who earn their livelihoods tilling the soil or working with their hands. Many of the great industrial cities of the heartland that supplied the military hardware to defeat Germany and Japan have become ghost towns leaving behind fractured communities and devastated families. Are these forgotten Americans our brethren or not, and will anyone speak for their interests?

Even more important than economics is the loss of independence and freedom of action that accompanies our thoughtless descent into the global marketplace. The United States has become increasingly vulnerable to turbulence in global markets, not mention incompetence and corruption among our "trading partners" in places as diverse as Mexico, Russia, and Malaysia. This has lead to numerous bailouts of Western bankers in contradiction to every principle of free-market economics that these alleged free traders believe is holy writ.

Moreover, in 1994 the United States joined a global institution, the World Trade Organization (WTO), where we have no veto. The WTO adjudicates trade disputes and has the power to level trade sanctions against governments that violate WTO "rules," effectively invalidating American laws in the name of protecting open trade and the "rights" of foreign investors. In short, a group of nameless bureaucrats in Switzerland can, with the stroke of a pen, overrule the elected legislators of our "democracy." The WTO has become a playpen of a global elite, and represents a forfeiture of American sovereignty and a giveaway to transnational corporations that have no loyalty to any nation or people.

The New York Times recently (March 11, 2001) ran a story on the dispute resolution mechanisms established by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Though different from WTO provisions, the apparatus established by NAFTA plays a similar role in the concerted attack on national prerogatives. Foreign investors who believe they have suffered a loss due to a breach of NAFTA rules may bring a claim against the government where the investment was made. The original intent of the rules was to protect American and Canadian businesses from expropriation at the hands of our Mexican "friends," who have a notorious history of nationalizing industries dominated by foreign investors.

But as night follows day, transnational corporate behemoths, with no loyalty beyond profit, have trained their guns on federal and various state laws via the dispute resolution panels. Even more absurdly, a Canadian-based funeral company is demanding compensation from the United States government because a Mississippi jury found the company guilty of trying to put a local funeral home out of business by using unfair business practices.

In another case, Methanex Corporation, a Vancouver-based fuel company, is challenging California's decision to discontinue use of a gasoline additive containing methanol, which Methanex produces. The state claims that the additive, MTBE, is a health hazard when it enters local water supplies.

Another NAFTA panel recently ordered the U.S. to permit unrestricted access to all U.S. roads by Mexican trucks. It is well documented that Mexico has virtually non-existent truck safety regulations, that Mexican trucks have many more safety deficiencies than American trucks, and that the U.S. lacks the facilities to adequately inspect those trucks entering our borders. Nonetheless, the Bush administration has accepted the decision of the NAFTA tribunal.

Ask yourself if a domestic company would be able to disregard environmental laws or ignore state safety regulations and the radical implications of such decisions become indisputable. The administration's pusillanimous response to a group of international arbitrators effectively puts the interests of foreign investors above their American competitors and represents an unconditional capitulation to global corporate interests. Is this why Patriots bled the ground red at Lexington and Saratoga? Did Lee and Grant, Meade and Jackson, Stewart and Sherman fight and die so their progeny could hand power to unelected international lawyers? When "conservatives" prattle about the "rule of law," is this what they mean? When "liberals" blather about "restoring democracy" do they understand the inherent threat to Western and democratic values posed by corporate globalism?

Yet there is no outrage. The only public figure to note the "Great Betrayal" has been Patrick Buchanan, who raised the banner of economic nationalism and was rewarded for his diligence and patriotism with less than 1% of the popular vote. As the great H.L. Mencken once said, "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." Indeed.

The Democrats and Republicans have sacrificed American workers and independence on the golden calf of the global economy. They have done so because they are addicted to the narcotic of soft money that they suckle from the teats of their corporate patrons, and in the process they have sold our birthright to the highest bidder.

A cosmopolitan, anti-Western elite, ostensibly meritocratic in nature, has established control of both major parties and virtually every viable institution, including the instruments of cultural dissemination. Their loyalties, as Christopher Lasch says, "are international rather than regional, national, or local." Will we have the courage to reclaim the heritage bestowed to us, to take back the nation-state from those who would destroy it, or will we opt instead to cower comfortably behind our televisions with a frothy cappuccino?



	"Free Trade" vs. The Nation-State Darrell Dow During the past year as George Bush and Albert Gore crisscrossed the country campaigning to become First Pharmacist, our already puerile political dialogue continued to degenerate into further insipidness and tedium. Perhaps Dr. Bush will induce a compliant and comatose Congress to include artificial stimulants in his upcoming prescription drug plan in an effort to stir the slumbering populace from a campaign-induced stupor. Surely there was a decrease in Sominex and Nytol sales as the campaign progressed. According to the Vanishing Voter Project conducted by the Shorenstein Center, only 36% of Americans paid close attention to the presidential race. And who can blame them? In an era of surface prosperity and mythical budget surpluses, free-lunch politics is the order of the day. Both candidates made promises that will bankrupt the next generation, bribing voters with their own money and pitting one group against another while ignoring issues like trade, immigration, and foreign policy that define our collective national destiny. Take trade for example. While the leaders of both parties show increasing support for a policy of trade uber alles, the Institute for Policy Studies found that a majority of voters (83%) want policymakers to consider goals--protecting workers, the environment, and American sovereignty--even if this means slowing the growth of the economy. Politicians from both parties, the architects of NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and PNTR for China, have joined hands with their corporate benefactors and media handmaidens to impose "free trade" policies even as the U.S. racks up a $300 billion merchandise trade deficit. While the stock market has soared to dizzying and unprecedented heights, at least until recently, our industrial base continues to erode as manufacturing jobs move overseas and factories close. America was once an industrial juggernaut, but today manufacturing jobs comprise the smallest share of the labor force in over a century. Even while record numbers of Americans have joined the workforce and work more hours than ever, median family income has been virtually stagnant since the early 1970's. Though free trade has been a boon to many, it has not always benefited our countrymen who earn their livelihoods tilling the soil or working with their hands. Many of the great industrial cities of the heartland that supplied the military hardware to defeat Germany and Japan have become ghost towns leaving behind fractured communities and devastated families. Are these forgotten Americans our brethren or not, and will anyone speak for their interests? Even more important than economics is the loss of independence and freedom of action that accompanies our thoughtless descent into the global marketplace. The United States has become increasingly vulnerable to turbulence in global markets, not mention incompetence and corruption among our "trading partners" in places as diverse as Mexico, Russia, and Malaysia. This has lead to numerous bailouts of Western bankers in contradiction to every principle of free-market economics that these alleged free traders believe is holy writ. Moreover, in 1994 the United States joined a global institution, the World Trade Organization (WTO), where we have no veto. The WTO adjudicates trade disputes and has the power to level trade sanctions against governments that violate WTO "rules," effectively invalidating American laws in the name of protecting open trade and the "rights" of foreign investors. In short, a group of nameless bureaucrats in Switzerland can, with the stroke of a pen, overrule the elected legislators of our "democracy." The WTO has become a playpen of a global elite, and represents a forfeiture of American sovereignty and a giveaway to transnational corporations that have no loyalty to any nation or people. The New York Times recently (March 11, 2001) ran a story on the dispute resolution mechanisms established by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Though different from WTO provisions, the apparatus established by NAFTA plays a similar role in the concerted attack on national prerogatives. Foreign investors who believe they have suffered a loss due to a breach of NAFTA rules may bring a claim against the government where the investment was made. The original intent of the rules was to protect American and Canadian businesses from expropriation at the hands of our Mexican "friends," who have a notorious history of nationalizing industries dominated by foreign investors. But as night follows day, transnational corporate behemoths, with no loyalty beyond profit, have trained their guns on federal and various state laws via the dispute resolution panels. Even more absurdly, a Canadian-based funeral company is demanding compensation from the United States government because a Mississippi jury found the company guilty of trying to put a local funeral home out of business by using unfair business practices. In another case, Methanex Corporation, a Vancouver-based fuel company, is challenging California's decision to discontinue use of a gasoline additive containing methanol, which Methanex produces. The state claims that the additive, MTBE, is a health hazard when it enters local water supplies. Another NAFTA panel recently ordered the U.S. to permit unrestricted access to all U.S. roads by Mexican trucks. It is well documented that Mexico has virtually non-existent truck safety regulations, that Mexican trucks have many more safety deficiencies than American trucks, and that the U.S. lacks the facilities to adequately inspect those trucks entering our borders. Nonetheless, the Bush administration has accepted the decision of the NAFTA tribunal. Ask yourself if a domestic company would be able to disregard environmental laws or ignore state safety regulations and the radical implications of such decisions become indisputable. The administration's pusillanimous response to a group of international arbitrators effectively puts the interests of foreign investors above their American competitors and represents an unconditional capitulation to global corporate interests. Is this why Patriots bled the ground red at Lexington and Saratoga? Did Lee and Grant, Meade and Jackson, Stewart and Sherman fight and die so their progeny could hand power to unelected international lawyers? When "conservatives" prattle about the "rule of law," is this what they mean? When "liberals" blather about "restoring democracy" do they understand the inherent threat to Western and democratic values posed by corporate globalism? Yet there is no outrage. The only public figure to note the "Great Betrayal" has been Patrick Buchanan, who raised the banner of economic nationalism and was rewarded for his diligence and patriotism with less than 1% of the popular vote. As the great H.L. Mencken once said, "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." Indeed. The Democrats and Republicans have sacrificed American workers and independence on the golden calf of the global economy. They have done so because they are addicted to the narcotic of soft money that they suckle from the teats of their corporate patrons, and in the process they have sold our birthright to the highest bidder. A cosmopolitan, anti-Western elite, ostensibly meritocratic in nature, has established control of both major parties and virtually every viable institution, including the instruments of cultural dissemination. Their loyalties, as Christopher Lasch says, "are international rather than regional, national, or local." Will we have the courage to reclaim the heritage bestowed to us, to take back the nation-state from those who would destroy it, or will we opt instead to cower comfortably behind our televisions with a frothy cappuccino?