>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:56:06 -0500 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: Bob Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Murray Dobbin in the Financial Post >Mime-Version: 1.0 > > > > >Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:16:20 -0800 >From: Murray Dobbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Bob Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >Subject: Finpost column > >Friends/colleagues: > >In a slightly bizarre turn of events I am now a columnist for the >Financial Post, in their Counterpoint Column. My column appears >every two weeks, starting today. As many/most of you do not >subscribe and those of who did are presumably boycotting the >National Post in support of the strikers at the Calgary Herald, >I am emailing the column for your perusal. I hesitate to do this >as it presumes a lot but make whatever use of the column that you >wish. The FP effectively gives me copyright and the column can be >reprinted freely so long as it is attributed. > > > > >The broken deal between big businesss and democracy > >By Murray Dobbin > >The post war period in the developed capitalist west was characterized >by a remarkable achievement. Those who ran the affairs of the worldís >largest corporations, decided that democracy would be considered a >legitimate cost of doing business. Like other costs in those heady >days, the costs and risks of democracy would be internalized. Legalized >trade unions, unemployment insurance and other measures empowering >labour, free public education, progressive tax systems, regulated >capital flows, public health care - all of these were accepted as >more or less in the interests of capitalism. > >No more. The social contract expired some time ago. No formal >negotiations are scheduled. > >Two key indicators of this new reality are now pretty much unmistakable. >The most recent was Paul Martinís budget. That this was a profoundly >undemocratic budget in the most obvious sense, no one denies. Polls >showed time and again that Canadians wanted a re-commitment by the >federal government to medicare, not tax cuts. The Liberalsí own polling, >done by Ekos, showed that tax cuts placed seventh out of eight spending >priorities. The relentless campaign by the National Post notwithstanding, >their was no tax rage in the country. > >But the budget was not just un-democratic, it was anti-democratic >because for a robust democracy to function it has to have enough money. >Beginning before the war ordinary Canadians redefined democracy by using >it to achieve a measure of equality and economic security that was >unheard of in the previous era. It was democracy as popular sovereignty >and it wasnít cheap. > >But Paul Martin now brags that the government spends relatively less >than it did in 1949. His recent five year budget with $58 billion in >tax cuts, effectively declares that Ottawa will never again be a full >partner in social programs. Some of that money will come back as a >result of increased spending but not nearly enough. And letís be clear >- this is not a budget for the middle class. Fully 42% of the personal >tax cuts will go to the top 10% of income earners. > >Thus the budget severely erodes equality at a time when disparities in >market income are at their highest since the 1930s; institutionalizes >almost pre-war levels of spending, and makes it clear that a small >elite will determine broad government policy. > >The other sign that democracy is no longer an accepted cost of doing >business has been the relentless efforts by transnational corporations >and their organizations to pursue multilateral trade and investment >agreements like the NAFTA, the MAI and the WTO. All of these agreements >promise to provide corporations with an unprecedented level of certainty >regarding the outcome of their investments. > >This is no-surprises democracy. Tired of having to continuously lobby >governments against the introduction of new laws, regulations and social >programs, corporate brotherhoods like the BCNI had a better idea: Sign >treaties which permanently constrain governments from regulating capital. > >This enterprise has been remarkably successful. Europeans have been told >by the WTO that they are not allowed to reject North American beef >because of hormone treatments; the US was forced to abrogate its own >Clean Air Act and allow in dirty gasoline from Venezuela; Canada, after >banning the neurotoxin MMT was obliged by NAFTA to reverse the ban and >compensate its manufacturer $20 million; the Auto Pact is in violation >of the WTO; and Canada is using the WTO to stop France from banning the >use of asbestos, the most carcinogenic substance on earth. > >Just how far will this corporate campaign for sanitized democracy go? >Driven by ideology it has none of the built in, practical limits >normally provided by history, tradition, political pluralism or >culture. Will it go as far as inferred by the Trilateral Commission, >the architect of the new elite consensus? Its 1976 study, ìThe >Governability of Democracy,î pined for the days when ìTruman had been >able to govern the country with the co-operation of a relatively small >number of Wall Street lawyers and bankers.î By the 1970s there was >ì..an excess of democracy. . ..[The public questioned] the legitimacy >of hierarchy, coercion, discipline, secrecy, and deception - all of >which are in some measure inescapable attributes of the process of >government.î > >Will the campaign heed its own Fraser Institute: ìWhy should it follow >that we that we have an equal right to vote in elections? We donít say >that everyone has an equal right to vote in IBM.î > >The corporate negotiating team for the post-war social contract >understood that stability provided by political legitimacy was >preferable to that provided by coercion. This generationís corporate >visionaries, if indeed there are any, had better pay attention. They >have been given fair warning. The thousands of young people battling in >Seattle were sending them a message: democracy is now in deficit and >they are the creditors. > > > ............................................. > Bob Olsen, Toronto [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ............................................. >
