Trans Pacific Partnership: A new Constitution

This past week the Trans Pacific
Partnership agreement has been post worthy on a couple of the more
read blogs. There are specific groups working to get the public up
to speed on this treaty. One is the Citizens Trade Campaign. 
Crooks and Liars posted Lee Camps Moment of Clarity episode
regarding the treaty. 
Common Dreams posted a video by Friends of the Earth.  This potential treaty has direct
bearing on the subject of innovation, production and infrastructure
as discussed in the posts regarding Richard Elkus’s thesis in his
book Winner Take All and MIT’s latest report on the subject.

Basically this is being referred to as
NAFTA on steroids. It is an agreement being negotiated in complete
secrecy with only those considered to be a direct player called
“clear trade advisers”(600 in the US) having access. Direct
players are not you and me, nor congress (you thought the drone
unitary executive stuff is tough to get? Ha!) nor that fourth branch
known as the press. Yes, Obama is up on this in that he is pushing
it.

I’ll let Citizens Trade Campaign sum it
up: 

Recently a portion of this document was
leaked. It is called the “Investment Chapter”. Public Citizens
has a review of it here.

I have read the first 17 pages of the Investment Chapter. It is these pages that provide the definitions and the
cans and can nots for the signatories. The remainder of the document
provides the means for achieving satisfaction. (Do read at least the
definitions of what is considered “investment”.)

What struck me in Public Citizens
review was that the system being setup as the arbiter of the trade
agreement is following the US’ fascination with “extra judicial”
proceedings as a viable means of following the ideals of our
Constitution. It’s those same thought processes that gave us
rendition, enhanced interrogation, military tribunals, unitary
executive. You can’t help but see our past 35 years of leadership in
the realm of pioneering new concepts in equality, fairness, justice,
and processes to achieve such. Concepts of “free market”,
“invisible hand”, and process of deregulation, economies of
scale, etc. How else do you explain the use of rotating corporate
tied lawyers as judges? Where is the separation of the judge and the plaintiff? This is right out of the current US play book on how to
better your nation with the social institution known as “revolving
door”?

You can see in this document the
culmination of work performed over the last 40 years (yes Carter
started the deregulation) by the conservative (internationally known
as neoliberal) ideology merged with Milton Friedman’s economics and
Ayn Rand’s objectivism. Dare I say, the TPP is to capitalism what
our Constitution was to democracy?

And that is where I really started
thinking. This document is not just about the particulars. It’s not
just about how trade will or will not happen, or whether a company
will be able to privatize the gains and socialize the risks and
losses, or whether people will be harmed. All those things will be
the result of the document.

Nope, this document is much more. 

This
document is the constitution of a new world order. It is an order
that has been the dream of many for ages upon ages that until this
time in humanity was not possible do to the limits of the technology
of the time. This is the document of what I coined a few years ago
as The United Corporations of Global. It is this aspect of the
document that the people of the world should be most fearful of. It
is not a trade agreement as I believe the common man (as in the court
concept of the “common man”) would think of the phrase “trade
agreement”. This is a constitution that is coming prepackaged with
the rules and regulations already written. Only, there is no need
for ratification to be a part of the creative process. This document
comes pre-ratified in that all a nation has to do is say “I’m in”.
It does not take a majority of the worlds nations or a super
majority like the original 13 colonies for this document to have
power. It has power because those writing it already agree to follow
it. Passing it in the US? Can you say “fast track”?

The documents greatest power is what I
alluded to when I mentioned rendition, unitary executive, enhanced
interrogation, military tribunals. Rationalization. This document
codifies the use of rationalization as a viable thought process for
achieving the advancement of humanity. It reinstates the fallibility
of human thinking, turning on it’s head the enlightenment age because
this document believes it is of enlightened thought. It rationalizes
as enlightenment the freeing of people to trade to the greatest level
of monetary efficiency. Such a thought is putting a human creation
ahead of humanity. It is totally antithetical to the goal of
enlightenment. ( I have to say, at this point our fellow Angry Bear
Bruce Webb I hope will add to the discussion as our resident
historian.)

What follows below are specific
excerpts from the document. It is legal speak. But it is not hard
to understand. I feel it is important that people read these
excerpts as this is how you will know the thinking and overall goal
of the document beyond the obvious selfish power grab by any
particular player or industry. This is a document written by people
who envision the world structured far differently than how we are
taught to view our social organization based on the US Constitution
and it’s meaning to the world. It does not matter if you believe our
national identity is a lot of myth, that we don’t hold up well to our
constitutional ideals. The fact is, the myths and ideals have
influence and they are not the myths and ideals held by those writing
the TPP at worst or are considered not applicable nor appropriate for
their desired structure at least.

This document is not just about how
nations will relate to each other, it also gives the same rights and
privileges to individual investor entities as representative of a
nation. Thus, keep in mind that anything you read here also means a
rich person or a business entity is treated as if they are the
nation. However, citizens are not at anytime mentioned as being a
“party” of any type other than when it comes to citizens
potentially creating a loss for a “party” or it’s investor
representative. In other words, “citizens” are at all times
considered to have lesser status such that citizens have no claim to
inalienable rights and the resultant rule of law. It is less than
slavery for in this document, the only recognized covered entities
are “party” which means a nation of signature and it’s
participants in the sector of said parties social interaction
referred to as “investment”. In fact, there is a defined party
entity specifically that is not of the party:

There is nothing in the list of
definitions that suggest or implies “citizen”. The only entities
covered and regulated by the TPP are those entities that are
creations of man.  Man is of no consideration regarding the benefits
of the relationships developed in this new constitution. Man is
only mentioned as a consequence of potential harm to the “parties”
in the form of financial loss. That’s it.

WE HAVE TO COME TO KNOW THE MIND OF THE
DOCUMENT! Even if we can prevent this document from taking effect,
we will not put an end to the ideology behind the document if we only
defeat the document based on it’s ability to do material harm. We
have to come to know the mind of this document so that we can be
certain to identify the thought within the new words that will be
written and spoken when those behind this document make their new
attempt at forming the world according to their ideology. We need to
know the mind so that we can educate those who will certainly face
the next attempt to implement such an ideology. This is why the
document is being created in such secrecy. We have learned from
NAFTA et al and those that are the mind of the document are aware of
our knowledge.

Thus I present the sections as they
relate to what I believe is the thinking of this new constitution so
that we can be aware of the overriding concepts that ultimately
reorder societies and would require a new thinking regarding who and
what we are, what our purpose is and where we are going as a species
on this planet. The TPP is presenting a new ideal of social order.
It is one I that find represents the worst of humanity.

This is where the sovereignty breaks
down and the new social order is created:

This is where the responsibility is
defined for achieving “favorable treatment”. The “Party” is
obliged to:

Who determines which party’s law is part
of the “principle legal systems of the world”? What is
“customary”. These are the phrases of those who are trying to
hedge. People agree to such language when they believe they have a
hidden advantage. This is not language of certainty.

Here is where the citizens of the world
become hog tied:

Consider the XL pipe line protests.
With this agreement, the protestors will have put the citizens of our
nation in jeopardy of having to pay for the losses. In other words,
a nations taxing apparatus is now bound as insurance against an
investor’s loss. Capitalism? Read about Excelaron and San LuisObispo County’s Huasna Valley. 

Article 12.7: Performance Requirements

1. No Party may, in connection with the
establishment, acquisition, expansion, management,

conduct, operation, or sale or other
disposition of an investment of an investor of a Party [or

of a non-Party] in its territory,
impose or enforce any requirement or enforce any

commitment or undertaking: 12

(a) to export a given level or
percentage of goods [or services] ;

(b) to achieve a given level or
percentage of domestic content;

(c) to purchase, use or accord a
preference to goods produced in its territory, or to

purchase goods from persons in its
territory;

(d) to relate in any way the volume or
value of imports to the volume or value of exports

or to the amount of foreign exchange
inflows associated with such investment;

( e) to restrict sales of goods [or
services] in its territory that such investment produces [or

supplies] by relating such sales in any
way to the volume or value of its exports or

foreign exchange earnings; [

(f) to transfer a particular
technology, a production process or other proprietary

knowledge to a person in its
territory;] [or]

(g) to supply exclusively from the
territory of the Party the goods that such investment

procedures [or the services that it
supplies] to a specific regional market or to the

world market [; or

(h) (i) to purchase, use, or accord a
preference to, in its territory, technology of the Party

or persons of the Party13 ; or

(ii) that prevents the purchase or use
of, or the according of a preference to, in its

territory, particular technology, so as
to afford protection on the basis of nationality to

its own investors or investments or to
technology of the Party or of persons of the

Party] .

2. No Party may condition the receipt
or continued receipt of an advantage, in connection with

the establishment, acquisition,
expansion, management, conduct, operation, or sale or other

disposition of an investment in its
territory of an investor of a Party [or of a non-Party,] on

compliance with any requirement:

(a) to achieve a given level or
percentage of domestic content;

(b) to purchase, use, or accord a
preference to goods produced in its territory, or to

purchase goods from persons in its
territory;

(c) to relate in any way the volume or
value of imports to the volume or value of exports

or to the amount of foreign exchange
inflows associated with such investment; or

(d) to restrict sales of goods [or
services] in its territory that such investment produces [or

supplies] by relating such sales in any
way to the volume or value of its exports or

foreign exchange earnings.

3. (a) Nothing in paragraph 2 shall be
construed to prevent a Party from conditioning the

receipt or continued receipt of an
advantage, in connection with an investment in its territory

of an investor of a Party [or of a
non-Party,] on compliance with a requirement to locate

production, supply a service, train or
employ workers, construct or expand particular

facilities, or carry out research and
development, in its territory.

Article 12.8: Senior Management and
Boards of Directors

1. No Party may require that an
enterprise of that Party that is a covered investment appoint to

senior management positions natural
persons of any particular nationality.

2. A Party may require that a majority
of the board of directors, or any committee thereof, of an enterprise of that Party that is a
covered investment, be of a particular nationality, or resident

in the territory of the Party, provided
that the requirement does not materially impair the

ability of the investor to exercise
control over its investment.

Article 12.15: Investment and
Environment] [ ,Health Safety and Labour] [ Article 12.15:

Health Safety and Environmental
Measures][

1. Nothing in this Chapter shall be
construed to prevent a Party from adopting, maintaining or

enforcing any measure otherwise
consistent with this Chapter that it considers appropriate to

ensure that investment activity in its
territory is undertaken in a manner sensitive to

environmental [ , health, safety, or
labour] [ , health or safety] concerns.]

2. The Parties recognize that it is
inappropriate to encourage investment by relaxing its health

safety or environmental measures.
Accordingly, a Party should not waive or otherwise

derogate from or offer to waive or
otherwise derogate from, such measures as an

encouragement for the establishment,
acquisition, expansion, or retention in its territory of an

investment of an investor.]

Article 12.15 his: Corporate Social
Responsibility

[ Each Party should encourage][ nothing
in this Chapter shall be construed to prevent a Party

from encouraging] enterprises operating
within its territory or subject to its jurisdiction to

voluntarily incorporate
internationally recognized standards of corporate social
responsibility in their internal policies, such as
statements of principle that have been endorsed or are supported by
the Parties. [ These principles address issues such as labor, the environment, human rights, community relations and
anti-corruption. The Parties remind those enterprises of the
importance of incorporating such corporate social
responsibility standards in their internal policies.]]