Great news everyone!

[andrewducker]

The amazing news is that a WTO subgroup has agreed tariff changes that will make it far, far easier for developing countries to sell crops to the developed world, and reduce the subsidies that we pay our own farmers, lifting hundreds of millions of farmers, their famillies and villages out of poverty.

Last week, a political battle was concluded that will probably have consequences for far more people than last week's UK general election.

At a low-key meeting in Paris, a group of anonymous technocrats finally reached an agreement that brightens the prospects of - literally - billions of people.

At stake was the pressing need for a fairer international trading system - particularly in agriculture. Campaign groups like Oxfam rightly protest that farmers in the EU (and US) operate behind high tariff barriers, while receiving subsidies of over $1bn (£530m) per day.

The EU shift came only days after the WTO confirmed its ruling that subsidies to European sugar farmers are illegal. "After that, the writing was on the wall," says a European Commission official. "We faced intense pressure, not only from member states, but from trade campaigners too".

Once all member states agree, finalising detailed contracts takes at least a year. So the WTO's Hong Kong summit in December is the real deadline for Doha.

With that in mind, last week's climb-down shows the big Western powers now take the rest of the world seriously.

"Several big Asian and Latin American countries are now major commercial players," says the Commission official. "We have to adjust to that, and if we don't do it through the WTO, the alternative is far more painful".

Full article here.

Comments

[fellow-traveler.livejournal.com]

"At a low-key meeting in Paris, a group of anonymous technocrats finally reached an agreement that brightens the prospects of - literally - billions of people."

Remind me again why conspiracy theories are irrational, please?

[andrewducker]

Depends what you mean by conspiracy theories...

If you mean "People having meetings to which you are not invited." then - all the time.

If you mean "People who secretly control the world" then I don't think anyone _controls_ the world. The WTO, for instance, has vast number of different groups influencing it - and even then, it ca be deadlocked for years. In this case, a bunch of representatives of different governments sorted out a trade agreement. That's what they're _supposed_ to do.

[stillcarl.livejournal.com]

I suspect what he meant was that up till now a few people, some who were already well-off, had been managing to get themselves subsidized at the European tax-payers' expense, never mind their potential competitors on the other side of the world. I'm sure there was a certain amount of conspiring to bring that about and keep it in place.

Here in NZ we gave up (most/all?) farm subsidies a couple of decades ago for the rather obvious reason that it didn't make much sense to subsidize our primary industry. It was painful for some though - Western World farmers can be just as attached to their land as a native to their forest - or any similar comparison you'd care to think of.

[andrewducker]

I'm sure there was a certain amount of conspiring. But when people talk about conspiracy theories they start talking about these groups as if they had control - and if modern politics has taught us anything it's that there isn't anyone in control.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

"If you mean "People who secretly control the world" then I don't think anyone _controls_ the world."

Does it not seem reasonable to you that the few richest people in the world exert the most influence? Most nations have to satisfy the whims of the largest nations whose governments in turn satisfy their richest benefactors.

When I think of the number of people who "control the world" it numbers in the thousands, they make decisions undemocratically behind closed doors that are in their own best interests and they aren't all working together.

Theories of population control and manipulation are only labelled "conspiracy theories" when the reality of them is too truly horrifying for intelligent people to stomach. Labelling something a conspiracy theory allows such people to dismiss them out of hand or in mockery despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Timothy McVeigh, Lee Oswald, James Ray, Mohammed Atta..4 of the biggest lies told to the American people in the last 40 odd years.

[andrewducker]

But I don't think those few thousand people are all working together either. Yes, there are people who exert more influence than others. But I don't think that 'big business' is a single bloc - they generally can't agree on _anything_ with each other for more than 5 minutes. Each one acts in its own self interests, and when their self interests happen to coincide (labour laws, for instance) they look like a conspiracy from the outside.

And I'm wondering why you believe all 4 of those people are the subject of a coverup. Are you, by any chance, automatically believing anything that makes the government look bad?

[andrewducker]

Oh, I believe that there are groups of people and governments acting in ways I disapprove of. But I don't, for instance, believe that 'big business' is a conspiracy - it's far too distributed and chaotic. And while I'm sure that government black ops do go on, I think that people can go overboard about it.

Whenever I hear the word 'conspiracy' it usually comes from people implying that various groups are working in some kind of carefully planned way, rather than the chaotic occurrences that generally actually occur.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

Well obviously not a small group of people is controlling everything that goes on. But I'd still say there's a few groups at the top of the pile that have meta plans and do their best to instigate them. That's one side of it.

The other side is whether or not a supposedly free nation with a democratically elected government is engaged in killing its own people so as to prevent a change in the current power structures.

The fact that, that is going on around us and we do nothing at all is the truly astounding thing. I have battery chicken syndrome myself but god knows what we can all do to help ourselves anymore.

[andrewducker]

Ignore them as much as possible and don't buy into their power games.

When you can make a difference do so.

Set a good example.

Don't be led into being automatically contrary to them - that's letting them define you.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

Well it's not as if any of us have a choice of buying into their power games, but somewhere down the line the world is a worse place for us tolerating these power structures. The third world would have been free and fed decades ago otherwise.

I think we move in the irght direction only as much as it beneifts those at the highest levels.

People will be killed on a huge scale and probably within our lifetime, I think it will happen and everyone will wonder how it could have. The German people know that feeling. By the time its in the cultural paradigm its already too late, except this time there won't be any outside countries to come to our aid.

Now hows that for a paranoid delusional's monologue?

[andrewducker]

Pretty bad.

If you want people in the third world fed, then _feed_ them. Donate money. Buy fair trade goods. Make sure that they get something from you. Encourage others to do likewise.

There's no conspiracy starving the third world - it's down to ordinary people not giving a damn.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

We live in a world where this exists:-

http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/terminator.shtml

and you think my drop in the ocean will make much difference? I buy free range and locally grown organic. The truth is no matter what I or another million people do, the masses are controlled and influenced by the guys upstairs (see The Long Game - Dr Who).

No offence, but I find suggestions such as "if everyone did the right thing then the world would be fine" to be a bit glib. You are a very bright and an aware guy, and I wouldn't harass you on LJ if I didn't respect you for that, but you must realise that all that happens when any "eco-warrior", "save the world" campaign gains public support it is immidiately used by the corporations to sell more products and become yet another monstrosity of the modern era.

The masses starve so that the few may live in moral bankrupcy and to excess.

The main reason why im so depressed is appreciating the horrible situation we all find ourselves in. We all do our bit, but really we could all do so much more.

Perhaps if I really cared I'd devote my life and risk losing it for such a cause. At least buying Fair Trade and giving ten pounds a month to charity will ease my conscience enough to feel justified in pointing the finger elsewhere whilst nothing in any real way changes.

[andrewducker]

_Nobody_ is forced to buy from Monsanto. They offer a product to farmers, but those farmers aren't stopped from continuing with their current crops.

The masses aren't controlled by anyone. They are influenced, and only so far as they allow themselves to be (which is less and less the more educated they are).

And if everyone did the right thingm the world _would_ be fine. And we're helped by things like the article in the post we're replying to, which should make life easier (and in some cases, possible) for hundreds of millions of people.

We all do our bit, but really we could all do so much more.

Go on then.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

Well I am pointing out your ridiculous naivety in dealing with such matters...so that's a step forward.

[andrewducker]

I'm not being at all naive. you're being overly-cynical. The reason that there are people still starving is because people say "I'm too powerless to do anything." and therefore nothing changes.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

I'm only a cynic if you can't see the inherent problems with an ideology that everyone should just do the right thing. That means all sorts of different things to different people and often ends in bloodshed. Communism didn't work for those ineherent reasons.

Don't get me wrong, you are technically correct, but you forgot to factor in human nature.

[andrewducker]

I didn't forget anything. I don't expect people to go out and start acting in a good way. My point was that it doesn't take conspiracy to cause massive problems - it just takes individuals being selfish.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

Yes but if you are born into a system that shapes you into the person you eventually become there has to be some accountability higher up somewhere. Unless you believe that the masses rather than the few have the most say in how the world works.

Every revolution leads to another slow steady trudge to the same abuses of power, it will take a mental paradigm shift to free us, not our charity.

[andrewducker]

I'm not talking about freeing us. We're as free as we want to be (hurrah for education, freedom of speech. etc).

I'm talking about feeding starving people in third world countries.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

Okay I'll deal with the illusion of education and freedom of speech first.

Education as we know it is not about true education. I consider true education is being inspired to learn and being taught how to work things out and seek information for yourself. Past the basics of math, writing, reading and the more advanced science, the typical education systems of the developed nations are nothing more than tools for teaching obedience and perpetuating the cultural paradigms that benefit the elite. They are sexist, racist, homophobic indoctrinators of religious and cultural dogma. They revise history to suit the current authorities, they encourage parrot fashion, consumerist thought patterns and next to the media are the biggest offenders of mental stupification. Only a few people make any real use of their education system and invariably those few would have done far better learning outside of such systems.


As for freedom of speech. Well we certainly do not have that freedom. There are obscenity laws and laws to 'keep the peace'. Popular media including books, television, newspapers and a lot of the internet new sites are tightly controlled by editors who have their own politcal and economic agendas. As indivisuals we have freedom of speech only if we can afford it and as long as nobody pays attention unless it supports the ideals of the elite. We don't have the freedom to gather in groups anymore without the threat of arrest. And of course we are all slaves to the economic grindstone.


Next to feeding the world. Well there are many more appropriate approaches to tackle the problems of developing nations and most of them involve mental paradigm shifts not economic interventions. Firstly if we fed all the people in the worst hit areas of the world, all that would happen is that fewer people would die for a while and the birth rate would rocket again, creating an even worse problem years later. Basic education and contraception are two vital aspects to use alongside any economic incentives. We need to end the industrial, biotech, military corporations grip on the Third World, because even if we only ever bought Fair Trade produce the well armed warlords would be getting all the profits anyway and their people would still live in abject poverty.

The best way to end the tyranny of those coporations is to expose them and the momentum of every human in the developed world snapping out of their trance and demanding change WILL bring change.

In the US soon it will break that the GOP rigged some of the ballots in swing states to ensure Bush's return to the White House. There is change on the horizon - you can smell it in the air here. What I would hope and encourage is that we see beyond the puppets like Bush and go straight to the heart. Thanks to the internet it may happen regardless of what the corporate controlled media cares to tell us.

The revolution will not be televised.

[andrewducker]

I can only say that we obviously went to different schools. I didn't get any religious indoctrination past the age of 9, and the stuff before that was pretty lightweight.

And I have perfect freedom of speech on my journal

Feeding people in the third world will work perfectly well if there is also education - education (particularly of women) is what has caused the huge drop in birth rates in the first world (now well below replenishment rate across most of it). And in those areas where the debt has been dropped significantly, they are educating themselves - and will do so more when the debt goes completely (fingers crossed that this happens soon).

And I'm failing to see, generally, the huge grip of the corporations on the third world - most of the problems seem to stem from tribalism and religion - both easily fixed with a generation or two of education.

[kelly-lesbo.livejournal.com]

Sadly its the first few years of our life that we are most vulnerable to social imprinting, so by age 9 you;ve already had a lot of rubbish stuffed into your head forming your world view. A lot of people fight their way out of it, many don't.

And if you truly believe that schools aren't breeding grounds of sexist sterotyping, gender re-enforcement and homophobia then we really did go to different schools. Its not just religious indoctrination, it's also cultural and historical as well as lessons of obedience.

If you re-read what I said about freedom of speech, you only get to say what you want if hardly anyone pays attention, if you come close to influencing people on a large scale then you would buffer up against the elite and if they didn't agree with what you were saying you would be dealt with as such people always are.

Of course you're failing to see the grip of corporations, you are still mired in the big illusion of freedom and democracy. The warring religious and tribal people are using weapons made by corporations who in turn give money to their political lap dogs to keep causing wars so that more weapons are sold.

We agree on the need for basic education at least, but I wouldn't make direct comparisons to the development of the developed nations because the timescales, politics and technological imperatives are totally different for developing nations in the present era.

[djtiresias.livejournal.com]

hurrah!

Now watch Congress ignore it!