The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
Rule By the Corporations
TTIP: The Corporate Empowerment Act
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The Transatlantic and Transpacific Trade and Investment Partnerships have nothing to do with free trade. “Free trade” is used as a disguise to hide the power these agreements give to corporations to use law suits to overturn sovereign laws of nations that regulate pollution, food safety, GMOs, and minimum wages.

The first thing to understand is that these so-called “partnerships” are not laws written by Congress. The US Constitution gives Congress the authority to legislate, but these laws are being written without the participation of Congress. The laws are being written by corporations solely in the interest of their power and profit. The office of US Trade Representative was created in order to permit corporations to write law that serves only their interests. This fraud on the Constitution and the people is covered up by calling trade laws “treaties.”

Indeed, Congress is not even permitted to know what is in the laws and is limited to the ability to accept or refuse what is handed to Congress for a vote. Normally, Congress accepts, because “so much work has been done” and “free trade will benefit us all.”

The presstitutes have diverted attention from the content of the laws to “fast track.” When Congress votes “fast track,” it means Congress accepts that corporations can write the trade laws without the participation of Congress. Even criticisms of the “partnerships” are a smoke screen. Countries accused of slave labor could be excluded but won’t be. Super patriots complain that US sovereignty is violated by “foreign interests,” but US sovereignty is violated by US corporations. Others claim yet more US jobs will be offshored. In actual fact, the “partnerships” are unnecessary to advance the loss of American jobs as there is nothing that inhibits jobs offshoring now.

What the “partnerships” do is to make private corporations immune to the laws of sovereign countries on the grounds that laws of countries adversely impact corporate profits and constitute “restraint of trade.”

For example, under the Transatlantic Partnership, French laws against GMOs would be overturned as “restraints on trade” by law suits filed by Monsanto.

Countries that require testing of imported food, such as pork for trichnosis, and fumigation would be subject to lawsuits from corporations, because these regulations increase the cost of imports.

Countries that do not provide monopoly protection for brand name pharmaceuticals and chemical products, and allow generics in their place, can be sued for damages by corporations.


Obama himself has no input into the process. Here is what is going on: The Trade Representative is a corporate stooge. He serves the private corporations and will go on to a million dollar annual salary. The corporations have bribed the political leaders in every country to sign away their sovereignty and the general welfare of their people to private corporations. Corporations have paid US senators large sums for transferring Congress’ law-making powers to corporations. When these “partnerships” pass, no country that signed will have any legislative authority to legislate or enforce any law that any corporation regards as inimical to its bottom line.

Yes, the great promiser of change is bringing change. He is turning Asia, Europe, and the US over to rule by the corporations.

Only those who have sold their integrity for money sign these agreements. Apparently Merkel, a Washington vassal, is one of them.

According to news reports, both of France’s main political parties have sold out to the corporations, but not Marine Le Pen’s National Front Party. In the last EU elections, the dissident parties, such as Le Pen and Farage’s, prevailed over the traditional parties, but the dissidents are yet to prevail in their own countries.

Marine Le Pen objects to the secrecy of the agreements that establishes corporate rule. As Europe’s only leader, she speaks:

“It is vital that the French people know about TTIP’s content and its motivations in order to be able to fight it. Because our fellow countrymen must have the choice of their future, because they should impose a model for society that suits them, and not one forced by multinational companies eager for profits, Brussels technocrats bought by the lobbies, and politicians from the UMP [party of former president Nicolas Sarkozy] who are subservient to these technocrats.”

It is vital that the American public also know, but not even Congress is permitted to know.

How does it work, this “freedom and democracy” that we Americans allegedly have, when neither the people nor their elected representatives are permitted to participate in the making of laws that enable private corporations to negate the law-making functions of governments and place corporate profit above the general welfare?

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Economics • Tags: Free Trade 
Hide 4 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Tom_R says:


    As I read you article, Sir, I nodded in agreement with every word you wrote. You are 100% right.

    Merkel is a disgrace. La Pen is France’s great hope.

    The corporate thugs have the US and EU politicians in their pockets.

    This must be stopped. How? Take away such powers from the politicians and give it back to the people.

    It is a constitutional amendment to allow national referenda, so US and other nations’ citizens (showing ID and with paper ballots) can pass good laws in the binding superseding national interest themselves. These referenda will supersede laws passed by Congress and cannot be overturned except on constitutional grounds by a supermajority of both houses AND a unanimous vote of the Supreme Court. The people can then still override it with a 66% vote.

    We can pass national referenda regarding taxes, foreign aid, immigration, bailouts, and debt ceilings, international trade etc. The people will be the fourth (or rather the 1st) branch of govt. and thus improve the checks and balances. We will solve 90% of our problems this way.

    For eg., see: (National Citizen’s Initiative For Democracy).

    We Americans need to visit these websites, join these groups, contribute and call radio talk shows, etc. and promote this idea and get the process started soon, before it is too late.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
  2. @Tom_R

    Removing the power from the government is a good thing. But handing over my rights to the masses via national referendum, no thanks. Especially if they can override a Constitutional challenge. Maybe, if you limit the vote to property owners who had all of their ancestors here in 1800. That would be the only way it should be considered.

    • Replies: @Tom_R
  3. MarkinLA says:

    Others claim yet more US jobs will be offshored. In actual fact, the “partnerships” are unnecessary to advance the loss of American jobs as there is nothing that inhibits jobs offshoring now.

    What a stupid thing to say. Without these trade agreements the corporation’s assets are at risk when the government changes and decides they want to nationalize them. This is a risk, however seemingly small, that someone must take into consideration when moving offshore. These agreements have nothing to do with trade and everything to do with the property rights of the foreign company. In the past the US government just threatened a place like Guatemala with an invasion on behalf of some scummy American corporation and it’s owners now they get it in writing beforehand.

  4. Tom_R says:
    @Chris Mallory


    There are 2 common criticisms made by those who oppose amending the constitution to allow binding superseding national referenda so people can pass good laws themselves. Both these arguments are without basis, as follows.

    1. “Tyranny of the majority” argument: This is a completely bogus argument, because there is no such thing as tyranny of the majority, because it is just democracy. The tyranny of the majority (which is basically democracy) is much better than the tyranny of the minority (which is basically real tyranny). We put up with majority choices all the time. Most pizzas stocked in stores are pepperoni, not eggplant, because that is what the majority wants. US Stores stock a lot of jeans, not togas, because that is what a lot of people want. A store would be out of business if it started stocking only togas and refused to sell jeans, claiming that stocking jeans is the “tyranny of the majority” and all men should wear togas, because a few feminists have decreed that. We all know the latter is really the tyranny.

    2. People are too stupid to make decisions in their own (i.e. public’s or the country’s) best interest. Really? So you trust politicians to make decisions for you and not yourself? The people collectively generally make better decisions than politicians because:

    People cannot all be bribed or corrupted; politicians can be.
    People cannot all be blackmailed easily; politicians can be.
    People cannot all be hijacked by special interests; politicians can be.

    Here are some examples.

    Immigration: 90% of the people against; politicians not so.
    Foreign aid: majority against; politicians not so.
    Gay marriage: 80% against, politicians not so.
    Free trade: majority against.

    So as you can see, the people have the common-sense to decide what is in their own and in the nation’s best interest, more than politicians. The politicians probably do too, but they are bribed and corrupted.

    If you do not trust yourself to decide what is good for you, and you believe a corrupt politician can decide for you what is good for you, better than you yourself can, then you deserve the crooked politicians that have dragged this country into the gutter.

    In national referenda, the people do not vote on each and ever little bill, such as what bridge to build, etc. They only vote on major issues that affect the nation as a whole.

    Many countries, including 3rd world countries, have binding superseding national referenda. These countries are doing fine and have less political corruption and corporatism than USA. Their people are happier.

    If 3rd world countries can have national referenda, why not western nations?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS