[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

1
0

[–] doginventer [S] 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

I completely understand the pessimism about our 'representatives looking out for our interests, but that is all the more reason to take every opportunity to stand up for ourselves. Their secrecy confirms that they are aware that the majority of people would not support this deal, and that if even a significant minority were to express the view of the majority then these backroom deals would become untenable.

0
0

[–] BigCheeze ago 

The secrecy could also confirm that they didn't believe the public is capable of making sense of a 2000+ page global trade agreement therefore relying on the media to interpret its significance to the public.

1
-1

[–] Gracchi 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

that if even a significant minority were to express the view of the majority then these backroom deals would become untenable.

I'm pretty sure a significant minority has expressed their views. Those in charge do not care. It's not just blind pessimism, it's reality. If we're going to move forward we need to get over this delusion we live under representative governments of the people. That's a fantasy we were taught and is what keeps people from taking action.

And your downvote doesn't change these facts.

0
0

[–] Lodley ago 

Their secrecy confirms that they are aware that the majority of people would not support this deal

That's how all agreements are created. Instead would you like a thousand 2,000 page treaty drafts floating around? People still link to the wikileaks even though the final text is out and is not the same as the leaked version.

0
0

[–] Lodley ago 

Giving your personal information to a random website is what always convinces our leaders to change. I mean if your not motivated enough to even look up your "minster" (no what the person is called in the USA you need to talk to), then your certainly motivated to:

  1. Figure out who your rep is

  2. Figure out how your rep voted

  3. Remember how you rep voted

  4. Vote accordingly at your next election

0
3

[–] doginventer [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I think they are very concerned about the court of public opinion, and are happy to claim that our lack of response is in itself a vindication of their actions.

0
0

[–] Lodley ago 

They could say that everyone lack of legitimate concerns are vindication of their actions. Nothing in the TPP is new but somehow when applied to these specific countries it's going to do something entirely different.

0
0

[–] Lodley ago  (edited ago)

"Just give your name and email address to this website and we'll email your 'ministers' " -totally not a spam site

I like how they include every country in the country selector even though there are only 12 countries where this might be relevant.

0
1

[–] CatNamedJava 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Yeah. Because policy wonks love to listen to a pre written spam from special interest.

0
0

[–] zen_music ago 

From a post yesterday by @dildonkers:

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/01/gray-state-film-family-killed-labeled.html

I can't shake the feeling there's a tragedy in the making and Genghis Khan will seem like a minor player afterward.

I get the concept that there are too many of us here on Earth; but other than the love of doing harm, I can't see why the TPP authors would not wait us out. I've heard different figures for what they think is a 'sustainable population' from 2 billion down to 500 million people, which doesn't take long to say but there's a world of pain between what we have and what they want. Whoever "they" are.

On the other hand, it's clear enough we can't keep on as we are. Never mind climate change: Fukushima, overfishing, there's all kinds of skullduggery going on out there while we screw around blowing up sand dunes. I haven't the faintest idea what the solution is, but somebody does and I know I won't like it.

What isn't clear is why the soldiers would be willing to do this harm. Surely there are people behind those shields; they have families. But no empathy at all? Anyone want to talk about this?

0
1

[–] doginventer [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Hi zen music.

I think you have touched on an important point when you say ' I can't see why the TPP authors would not wait us out.' because it shows that these things do not just happen by themselves. The relative empowerment of an ever shrinking number of individals is in itself a precarious position and requires ever more extreme measures to avoid collapse.

Overpopulation is, I believe, a myth, even if localised overcrowding and deprivation are obvious. Humans are the most valuable resource, and I think it is telling that the proven method to reduce birth rates is to increase the material security of the population.

There is undoubtedly a great deal to depress and discourage us, but I think we should resist the urge to think that any given scenario is inevitable.

I find that Voat in particular can be pretty overwhelming in its focus on the problems of the world, but even here theres plenty to smile about - not least that we all struggle to have our little say. I think that Voat would likely be an early victim of the internet controls in the current crop of trade treatys, and that alone would make it worth speaking up about, but no single solution is going to make everything better.

Billions of us living up to the best of ourselves is my hope. : )

0
0

[–] zen_music ago 

You take a very encouraging attitude, and I appreciate it. Certainly I enjoy, far out on the edge of Earth as I am, a pretty positive society in general. And I agree about Voat's tendency to slide into dark conjectures.

I've tried to adopt this idea: "If it's all biased, your best answer is to read all of the tissues of lies, and hope the truth falls somewhere in the middle". Sadly, reading links from Voat, and then links from those links, has often led me to feel these dark themes are corroborated. It gets harder and harder to believe there isn't a "deep state", and the TPP is one of the best blowtorches heating up that idea today. The old saying: Just because you re paranoid it doesn t mean they aren t out to get you. (My punctuation just went for shit, I hit some random key)

I do believe in the essential goodheartedness of my fellow man. I have never been in a place where it was really tested, never inhabited an "it's you or me, buddy" society. I have no way of even imagining what the people feel like who have erupted onto the world stage with their deprivation and desperation, much less how the elites feel who command all these different armed forces. Nor do I understand the armed forces very well, beyond the savage joy of using the most destructive tools in the modern world. In a way, I'm glad not to deal with that, it's a terrible life no matter where on that scale you are. I hope to die before it becomes the world setting for society.

What I meant to point to with that link about "Gray State" was that we are not really very far away from many of the social forms that were shown to us in the past couple of years with "The Hunger Games" - the difference being that we could not rely on a "positive" outcome, if you could even call it that. I remember a poignant drawing from years ago: on one side of the room, a Samurai warrior stands in a martial arts pose in his leather armor, his arms cocked in a combat-ready stance, his meditation and resolve apparent on his face... while across the room, a man with a revolver has just shot him in the heart, and in the moment we see the warrior, he has yet to fall. Like Wile E. Coyote.

I wish I felt better about all this.