May 16, 2008
You've probably heard that John McCain once said, "I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues." This line is regularly referenced by Democratic television pundits as evidence that McCain is unprepared to lead the country during a recession.
The criticism is certainly valid, but it ignores something more troubling. It's not that politicians like McCain "need to be educated" about economics, as he admitted. It's that they do not comprehend how economics impacts international affairs.
Behold McCain at a recent town meeting.
"We need our Canadian friends, and we need their continued support in Afghanistan," he said. "So what do we do? The two Democratic candidates for president say they're going to unilaterally abrogate NAFTA. How do you think the Canadian people are going to react to that?"
Opinion-makers, think-tankers and other assorted conventional wisdom spewers depict McCain's thesis as unquestioned truth. They claim that though most Americans oppose our trade policies, the world's masses love them, and if we change those policies we will lose allies.
This rationale justifies the fabled Washington Consensus-the set of right-wing globalization measures currently destabilizing the world economy. And because our politicians' international curiosity begins and ends with turning French fries into Freedom Fries, this rationale goes unchallenged in America's political debate.
Facts, however, are persistent things-facts like the Toronto Star report showing "almost half of all Canadians [believe] NAFTA should be renegotiated," with 80 percent saying it has done little or nothing for workers. McCain wonders how Canadians will react to NAFTA criticism, but the results are already in: According to polls, they prefer the NAFTA-bashing Barack Obama by a five-to-one margin over the NAFTA-glorifying Arizona senator.
"Canadians believe NAFTA needs serious work," said Jack Layton, leader of Canada's New Democratic Party. The likely prime minister candidate told me he wants to reform the pact because it helps corporations overturn laws and because its lack of standards forces workers into a wage-cutting, environment-destroying race to the bottom.
"NAFTA has become the template for other trade negotiations," Layton said. President Bush says that's terrific-that, for instance, rewarding Colombia's brutal government with a NAFTA-style pact will quell anti-Americanism from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. But Layton said these deals are "the real problem" for America around the world-and he has more pesky facts to support the assertion.
The Los Angeles Times reports that polls show animosity toward U.S. globalization policies is growing throughout Latin America. Mexicans now oppose NAFTA by a two-to-one margin-predictable considering their country's plight. In the 14 years preceding NAFTA, Mexico was among Latin America's fastest-growing economies. In the 14 years since, it is among the slowest.
When I spoke with Costa Rican economist Otton Solis, he told me, "Many Latin Americans see these trade agreements as an imposition." He pointed to accords helping agribusiness crush local farmers and pharmaceutical companies inflate medicine prices as typical examples of America foisting corporate-written edicts on poorer countries.
Solis narrowly lost his 2006 bid for Costa Rica's presidency, and he plans to run again on anti-Washington Consensus themes. He noted that just as in the United States, the public in South America is not clamoring for lobbyist-written trade deals-"only the elites are." Far from a diplomatic panacea, Solis said, these policies help anti-American rulers like Chavez, who cite them as proof of imperialism.
Now there is the possibility of change. Come November, if Americans elect leaders who are serious about reforming trade policies-a big if-then we may get a government that understands the relationship between economics and foreign policy. We could see a new Washington Consensus: one that actually reflects public consensus at home and abroad.
David Sirota is the best-selling author of "Hostile Takeover" (Crown, 2006). He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network, both nonpartisan research organizations. His daily blog can be found at www.credoaction.com/sirota.
(c) 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
© 2023 TruthDig
David Sirota
David Sirota is an award-winning journalist and bestselling author living in Denver, Colorado. He was nominated for an Academy Award for his work helping create the story for the film DON'T LOOK UP, which became one of the most widely viewed movies in Netflix's history. He is the founder and editor of The Daily Poster, an editor at large at Jacobin Magazine and a columnist at The Guardian. He served as Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign speechwriter in 2020. Sirota is the author of "Back to Our Future" and "Hostile Takeover: How Big Money & Corruption Conquered Our Government--And How We Take It Back". His website: www.davidsirota.com.
You've probably heard that John McCain once said, "I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues." This line is regularly referenced by Democratic television pundits as evidence that McCain is unprepared to lead the country during a recession.
The criticism is certainly valid, but it ignores something more troubling. It's not that politicians like McCain "need to be educated" about economics, as he admitted. It's that they do not comprehend how economics impacts international affairs.
Behold McCain at a recent town meeting.
"We need our Canadian friends, and we need their continued support in Afghanistan," he said. "So what do we do? The two Democratic candidates for president say they're going to unilaterally abrogate NAFTA. How do you think the Canadian people are going to react to that?"
Opinion-makers, think-tankers and other assorted conventional wisdom spewers depict McCain's thesis as unquestioned truth. They claim that though most Americans oppose our trade policies, the world's masses love them, and if we change those policies we will lose allies.
This rationale justifies the fabled Washington Consensus-the set of right-wing globalization measures currently destabilizing the world economy. And because our politicians' international curiosity begins and ends with turning French fries into Freedom Fries, this rationale goes unchallenged in America's political debate.
Facts, however, are persistent things-facts like the Toronto Star report showing "almost half of all Canadians [believe] NAFTA should be renegotiated," with 80 percent saying it has done little or nothing for workers. McCain wonders how Canadians will react to NAFTA criticism, but the results are already in: According to polls, they prefer the NAFTA-bashing Barack Obama by a five-to-one margin over the NAFTA-glorifying Arizona senator.
"Canadians believe NAFTA needs serious work," said Jack Layton, leader of Canada's New Democratic Party. The likely prime minister candidate told me he wants to reform the pact because it helps corporations overturn laws and because its lack of standards forces workers into a wage-cutting, environment-destroying race to the bottom.
"NAFTA has become the template for other trade negotiations," Layton said. President Bush says that's terrific-that, for instance, rewarding Colombia's brutal government with a NAFTA-style pact will quell anti-Americanism from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. But Layton said these deals are "the real problem" for America around the world-and he has more pesky facts to support the assertion.
The Los Angeles Times reports that polls show animosity toward U.S. globalization policies is growing throughout Latin America. Mexicans now oppose NAFTA by a two-to-one margin-predictable considering their country's plight. In the 14 years preceding NAFTA, Mexico was among Latin America's fastest-growing economies. In the 14 years since, it is among the slowest.
When I spoke with Costa Rican economist Otton Solis, he told me, "Many Latin Americans see these trade agreements as an imposition." He pointed to accords helping agribusiness crush local farmers and pharmaceutical companies inflate medicine prices as typical examples of America foisting corporate-written edicts on poorer countries.
Solis narrowly lost his 2006 bid for Costa Rica's presidency, and he plans to run again on anti-Washington Consensus themes. He noted that just as in the United States, the public in South America is not clamoring for lobbyist-written trade deals-"only the elites are." Far from a diplomatic panacea, Solis said, these policies help anti-American rulers like Chavez, who cite them as proof of imperialism.
Now there is the possibility of change. Come November, if Americans elect leaders who are serious about reforming trade policies-a big if-then we may get a government that understands the relationship between economics and foreign policy. We could see a new Washington Consensus: one that actually reflects public consensus at home and abroad.
David Sirota is the best-selling author of "Hostile Takeover" (Crown, 2006). He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network, both nonpartisan research organizations. His daily blog can be found at www.credoaction.com/sirota.
(c) 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.
David Sirota
David Sirota is an award-winning journalist and bestselling author living in Denver, Colorado. He was nominated for an Academy Award for his work helping create the story for the film DON'T LOOK UP, which became one of the most widely viewed movies in Netflix's history. He is the founder and editor of The Daily Poster, an editor at large at Jacobin Magazine and a columnist at The Guardian. He served as Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign speechwriter in 2020. Sirota is the author of "Back to Our Future" and "Hostile Takeover: How Big Money & Corruption Conquered Our Government--And How We Take It Back". His website: www.davidsirota.com.
You've probably heard that John McCain once said, "I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues." This line is regularly referenced by Democratic television pundits as evidence that McCain is unprepared to lead the country during a recession.
The criticism is certainly valid, but it ignores something more troubling. It's not that politicians like McCain "need to be educated" about economics, as he admitted. It's that they do not comprehend how economics impacts international affairs.
Behold McCain at a recent town meeting.
"We need our Canadian friends, and we need their continued support in Afghanistan," he said. "So what do we do? The two Democratic candidates for president say they're going to unilaterally abrogate NAFTA. How do you think the Canadian people are going to react to that?"
Opinion-makers, think-tankers and other assorted conventional wisdom spewers depict McCain's thesis as unquestioned truth. They claim that though most Americans oppose our trade policies, the world's masses love them, and if we change those policies we will lose allies.
This rationale justifies the fabled Washington Consensus-the set of right-wing globalization measures currently destabilizing the world economy. And because our politicians' international curiosity begins and ends with turning French fries into Freedom Fries, this rationale goes unchallenged in America's political debate.
Facts, however, are persistent things-facts like the Toronto Star report showing "almost half of all Canadians [believe] NAFTA should be renegotiated," with 80 percent saying it has done little or nothing for workers. McCain wonders how Canadians will react to NAFTA criticism, but the results are already in: According to polls, they prefer the NAFTA-bashing Barack Obama by a five-to-one margin over the NAFTA-glorifying Arizona senator.
"Canadians believe NAFTA needs serious work," said Jack Layton, leader of Canada's New Democratic Party. The likely prime minister candidate told me he wants to reform the pact because it helps corporations overturn laws and because its lack of standards forces workers into a wage-cutting, environment-destroying race to the bottom.
"NAFTA has become the template for other trade negotiations," Layton said. President Bush says that's terrific-that, for instance, rewarding Colombia's brutal government with a NAFTA-style pact will quell anti-Americanism from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. But Layton said these deals are "the real problem" for America around the world-and he has more pesky facts to support the assertion.
The Los Angeles Times reports that polls show animosity toward U.S. globalization policies is growing throughout Latin America. Mexicans now oppose NAFTA by a two-to-one margin-predictable considering their country's plight. In the 14 years preceding NAFTA, Mexico was among Latin America's fastest-growing economies. In the 14 years since, it is among the slowest.
When I spoke with Costa Rican economist Otton Solis, he told me, "Many Latin Americans see these trade agreements as an imposition." He pointed to accords helping agribusiness crush local farmers and pharmaceutical companies inflate medicine prices as typical examples of America foisting corporate-written edicts on poorer countries.
Solis narrowly lost his 2006 bid for Costa Rica's presidency, and he plans to run again on anti-Washington Consensus themes. He noted that just as in the United States, the public in South America is not clamoring for lobbyist-written trade deals-"only the elites are." Far from a diplomatic panacea, Solis said, these policies help anti-American rulers like Chavez, who cite them as proof of imperialism.
Now there is the possibility of change. Come November, if Americans elect leaders who are serious about reforming trade policies-a big if-then we may get a government that understands the relationship between economics and foreign policy. We could see a new Washington Consensus: one that actually reflects public consensus at home and abroad.
David Sirota is the best-selling author of "Hostile Takeover" (Crown, 2006). He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network, both nonpartisan research organizations. His daily blog can be found at www.credoaction.com/sirota.
(c) 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.