http://tradewatch.org.au/blog/2009/03/05/not-much-free-about-this-free-trade-agreement/ Find news and analysis of globalisation's impacts on people & the planet and the prospects for fair and sustainable economies, from Global Trade Watch. Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:57:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 http://tradewatch.org.au/blog/2009/03/05/not-much-free-about-this-free-trade-agreement/comment-page-1/#comment-960 Paul Holland Fri, 06 Mar 2009 06:15:03 +0000 http://tradewatch.org.au/blog/?p=147#comment-960 A free trade policy, ie a 'real' one is an essential component for third world countries to move out of poverty - only a component, not the answer. It is poor nations that revert to or adopt government models dissimilar to democracies. Wealth creates capitalist/free market/democratic systems of government. There are many distinctions between 'dictatorships' and 'totalitarian' government models. For instance, most dictatorships don't have elections whereas many totalitarian governments such as China do. There is a component of democracy even within Red China as there was behind the iron curtain. The transition between a Red China form of communism and democracy is not such a huge step, particularly now that China is adopting a captitalist model. What I am saying here is that we should be dealing with everyone, even Burma, because the best way of ousting a cruel totalitarian regime is to make its citizenry rich. There are some totalitarian regimes that are extremely benevolent, eg Brunei. For instance, the United Nations would have best defeated the Taliban by bombing the country with money instead of spending it on weapons of mass destruction. A free trade policy, ie a ‘real’ one is an essential component for third world countries to move out of poverty – only a component, not the answer. It is poor nations that revert to or adopt government models dissimilar to democracies. Wealth creates capitalist/free market/democratic systems of government. There are many distinctions between ‘dictatorships’ and ‘totalitarian’ government models. For instance, most dictatorships don’t have elections whereas many totalitarian governments such as China do. There is a component of democracy even within Red China as there was behind the iron curtain. The transition between a Red China form of communism and democracy is not such a huge step, particularly now that China is adopting a captitalist model. What I am saying here is that we should be dealing with everyone, even Burma, because the best way of ousting a cruel totalitarian regime is to make its citizenry rich. There are some totalitarian regimes that are extremely benevolent, eg Brunei. For instance, the United Nations would have best defeated the Taliban by bombing the country with money instead of spending it on weapons of mass destruction.

]]>