Reply #74: There are differences, but you haven't described them correctly [View All]

[tameszu]

No, the WTO represents the GOVERNMENTS of the world just as much as the UN does. There are no seats on the WTO for individuals or corporations, and the representatives to the WTO are JUST as accountable as are the representatives of the UN.

In all democratic countries I know of, by executive branch appointees from each country: trade reps and finance/trade ministers/secretaries for the WTO and diplomats or foreign ministers/secretaries for the UN.

Procedurally and formally at least, there is no difference as far as REPRESENTATION goes.

Now, you may say "well, corporations have a big influence on the trade reps and finance ministers." Well, the same goes with many interests on the diplomats. The UN and WTO are analogous--they were created together (the WTO was the GATT), along with the World Bank and the IMF, as part of a pretty coherent vision of international cooperation. Parts of that vision have worked out better and worse, but if you asked Kofi Annan, he would pretty unequivocally back the WTO and tell DK that he would be incredibly foolish to rescind it.

Kucinich may believe in international trade and cooperation, but he has no idea how to make it work. His proposal to go back to a system of bilateral trade would MASSIVELY SCREW OVER countries less powerful than the U.S., since it would allow the U.S. to use its economic power to completely roll over--which it would do, as soon as someone other than Kucinich won the executive (or maybe sooner, as some of the demands by labor unions for protectionist measures would effectively do exactly that).