From: HANLY-AT-BrandonU.CA
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 11:49:30 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: NAFTA , EU, regional blocs



Recently Adam wrote:

This has particular relevance in Europe where there is continuous
debate over the European Union. Every so often, there are referendums
on issues related to this question and socialists are forced to decide
to vote for one side or the other, or boycott the referendum altogether.
For instance, it is doubtful if Germany could merge the Mark into a Single
European Currency without a referendum.

These arguments within the ruling class are not on the basis of "for or
against  free trade". Free Trade within the EU or NAFTA is not the same as free
trade per se. [ In fact, "Free Trade" arises as a serious capitalist slogan only
when there is effectively only one major Imperialist bloc, as there was in the
early days of the British Empire or after WWII, and quite often arises at the
same time as "imperialist anti imperialism". ] They are about one bloc of capital
feeling that in order to negotiate from a strong position with other national
capitals, it has to band together with its nearest neighbours.

When governments implement or try to implement this sort of alliance,
socialists should oppose them. Concretely, this means voting against
integration. Of course, this does not mean we go along with the petty
nationalism of their opponents. But the overwhelming thrust of the capitalists
in that region is for it : they want a bankers Europe, where capitalists are
free to make money and we have to take Chirac style cuts, "British" style
restructuring, etc ; or a North and Central America run in the interests of the
mainly US based multinational corporations. We should oppose them, and argue
instead for workers unity against the bosses of whatever nationality - which
also conflicts with nationalist opposition to regional blocs.
   COMMENT: I agree entirely with Adam's analysis. I would mention as well
that trade agreements such as NAFTA restrict the role of 
elected left leaning governments. A good example of this is in Ontario
that elected an NDP government that campaigned to introduce public monopoly
auto insurance -as already exists in several other Canadian provinces including
Manitoba. The NDP decided not to go ahead with this because under the terms of
NAFTA they would have had to pay huge sums in compensation for lost business to
US insurance firms. Another even more galling consequence of NAFT
 is the rationalization
of patent protection for drugs. The federal government passed a bill giving
up to 20 year patent protection for drugs -this was revealed to be a
precondition for NAFTA negotiations. This is estimated -according to US health
economists- to add about a billion a year to medical costs in Canada by the end
of the century. We also did away with a committee that monitored prices of
patented drugs and if they were regarded as too high, other firms were allowed
to manufacture the drugs under licence and pay royalties to the patent holder.
This forced patent holders to charge lower prices. Now this is gone. All
for the benefit of transnational capital. There is no war on these druggies.
    Socalled free trade agreements are nothing but regional cartels designed
to restrict trade with non-members, promote free inter-regional flow of capital
and destroy national safety nets. Although national labor may win some battles
ultimately only international solidarity will be effective. There are already
links formed between Canadian, US, and Mexican labor groups to take common
action.
   Cheers, KEn Hanly
  Cheers, Ken Hanly



     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------