deal appears to have been done behind closed doors
Why is this a bad thing? Why would any country want public relations / media involvement with this?
I get that transparent government is a nice idea, but most people are just not equipped to understand such negotiations at all.
Supposedly it helps keep government officials accountable. But look at the USA, followthemoney.org is out there.
Much of the lobbying is publicly known, for years and years, and it does not change much of anything.
When such negotiations are made supposedly transparent, real negotiation just moves into back channels.
Open negotiations are not analogous to open source software.
This needs to be more widely read: http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/open-source-open-government-critique-open-politics-0 / https://archive.is/2ZWGC
Why would any country want public relations / media involvement with this?
Uhh because its going to affect us? And not only that but the indigenous people of my country don't get a say either if this happens. Idk why you are wanting a bourgeois state to conduct anti prole trade deals behind closed doors.
I get that transparent government is a nice idea, but most people are just not equipped to understand such negotiations at all.
This is why you educate people. We were going to sign up for TPP but there was a big protest movement against it. I don't think that it would have stopped it but the masses are not as ignorant as you think.
USA was excluded from the TPP/CPTPP by Donald Trump.
Hillary Clinton if elected would no doubt have gone forward; it was already signed by the Obama administration.
What blocked the TPP in the USA was not the masses but rather competing bourgeoisie interests behind the Dem/Rep parties.
The bourgeoisie behind the Rep party like tariffs, such as tariffs against Chinese products, and thus tend to oppose free trade agreements.
But in no case was this about helping workers or listening to the people.
TPP was leaked, it was not an open negotiation. After that leak, closed negotiations continued.
The reason indigenous people of your country most likely have no say is because the country government excludes them.
If the government included them, they would have their say, and it would still not require open negotiations.
I was actually referring to the protest movement in my country sorry. You still haven't argued why closed negotiations are beneficial from the standpoint of protecting workers and indigenous rights.
Why is this a bad thing? Why would any country want public relations / media involvement with this?
I get that transparent government is a nice idea, but most people are just not equipped to understand such negotiations at all.
Supposedly it helps keep government officials accountable. But look at the USA, followthemoney.org is out there.
Much of the lobbying is publicly known, for years and years, and it does not change much of anything.
When such negotiations are made supposedly transparent, real negotiation just moves into back channels.
Open negotiations are not analogous to open source software.
This needs to be more widely read: http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/open-source-open-government-critique-open-politics-0 / https://archive.is/2ZWGC
Uhh because its going to affect us? And not only that but the indigenous people of my country don't get a say either if this happens. Idk why you are wanting a bourgeois state to conduct anti prole trade deals behind closed doors.
This is why you educate people. We were going to sign up for TPP but there was a big protest movement against it. I don't think that it would have stopped it but the masses are not as ignorant as you think.
USA was excluded from the TPP/CPTPP by Donald Trump.
Hillary Clinton if elected would no doubt have gone forward; it was already signed by the Obama administration.
What blocked the TPP in the USA was not the masses but rather competing bourgeoisie interests behind the Dem/Rep parties.
The bourgeoisie behind the Rep party like tariffs, such as tariffs against Chinese products, and thus tend to oppose free trade agreements.
But in no case was this about helping workers or listening to the people.
TPP was leaked, it was not an open negotiation. After that leak, closed negotiations continued.
The reason indigenous people of your country most likely have no say is because the country government excludes them.
If the government included them, they would have their say, and it would still not require open negotiations.
I was actually referring to the protest movement in my country sorry. You still haven't argued why closed negotiations are beneficial from the standpoint of protecting workers and indigenous rights.