Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: TPP and these other trade deals show the end result of capitalism... [View all]pampango
(24,692 posts)46. FDR's ITO pioneered the concept of neutral arbitration of trade disputes, much more than just
reducing tariffs. His ITO also introduced employment, labor and development standards as part of a trade agreement.
Along with the World Bank and the IMF, the International Trade Organization (ITO) formed the centrepiece of new kind of international organization in the mid to late 1940s. At the time, what was particularly novel about the Havana Charter was that it was not simply or mainly a trade organization like the WTO, its latter day descendent. At its core, the countries of the world, rejected the idea that it was possible to maintain a firewall between trade, development, employment standards and domestic policy. Its most distinctive feature was the integration of an ambitious and successful program to reduce traditional trade barriers, with a wide-angled agreement that addressed investment, employment standards, development, business monopolies and the like. It pioneered the idea that trade disputes had to be settled by consultation and mediation rather than with legal clout. Further it established an institutional linkage between trade and labour standards that would effect a major advance in global governance. Finally it embedded the full employment obligation, along with "a commitment to free markets" as the cornerstone of multilateralism.
Despite these accomplishments, the US Congress refused to ratify the Havana Charter even though it had signed it. As a direct consequence, the ITO's collapse represented a significant closure of the full employment era internationally. In the end, it's demise made possible the rapid return of the free trade canon that increasingly, would impose its authority and ideology on all international organizations and on the practice of multilateralism. As this essay concludes, its history compelling because whatever its apparent shortcomings, governments, economists and ordinary people demanded that trade, employment goals and developmental needs should reinforce each other in the world trading system.
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/csgr/research/workingpapers/2000/wp6200.pdf
The republican congress rejected the ITO proposed by FDR and negotiated by Truman, precisely for the national sovereignty concern about a multilateral organization making decisions that would affect the US.
The IMF and World Bank were approved by congress while it was still controlled by Democrats. The negotiation of the ITO did not end until republicans had taken control of congress. GATT was a supposed to be a temporary part of the ITO. Truman authorized it by executive order since he thought the republican congress would kill that too.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
TPP and these other trade deals show the end result of capitalism... [View all]
AZ Progressive
Nov 2015
OP
The only transfers that have taken place are those going to the 1%-ers in poor countries.
eridani
Nov 2015
#4
Most of the wealth will disappear when taken, since it is just paper. Then, Americans
Hoyt
Nov 2015
#5
The OP is about capitalism. Apparently, you have no interest in helping poor countries.
Hoyt
Nov 2015
#18
The purpose of an empire is to fuck over countries for the benefit of the 1% everywhere
eridani
Nov 2015
#23
Yeah, poor countries will progress trading among themselves. I thinj they've tried that.
Hoyt
Nov 2015
#31
India has made cheap pharmaceutical knockoffs for years. Very successfully, too.
eridani
Nov 2015
#35
True, but reducing tariffs is just reducing tariffs. It has nothing to do with ISDS and other--
eridani
Nov 2015
#44
FDR's ITO pioneered the concept of neutral arbitration of trade disputes, much more than just
pampango
Nov 2015
#46
Give an example of a tribunal overruling a government in the FDR/Truman era n/t
eridani
Nov 2015
#48
I can't. The republican-controlled congress rejected FDR's ITO. FDR and Truman believed in
pampango
Nov 2015
#52
OK, then how about an example of ISDS overruling any government before NAFTA n/t
eridani
Nov 2015
#53
I care about poor everywhere, and think TPP is one way to help all of them, including those here.
Hoyt
Nov 2015
#37
What is your proposal to help the poor globally? Do nothing, stifle trade, what then?
Hoyt
Nov 2015
#39
Stop big pharma from jacking up prices for generics by stopping TPP, for one n/t
eridani
Nov 2015
#47
Don't think TPP does anything to generics. Well, maybe prevents a. Country from counterfeiting
Hoyt
Nov 2015
#49
Well isn't that a good thing...the end of capitalism? Isn't that what DUers want?
kelliekat44
Nov 2015
#14
And yet the past 20 years have seen the largest *decrease* in global inequality in history
Recursion
Nov 2015
#24
The 1% did even better before FDR when there were no trade agreements and little trade.
pampango
Nov 2015
#41