>The media have been full of abuse for the Seattle protests. One of their
>favorite debating points has been to claim that the developing countries
>adore the WTO, and fear only that perfidious Northern unions will impose
>labor standards. This of course ignores that the Third World unions and
>development groups have fiercely opposed the WTO agenda accross the board --
>intellectual property rights, investment policy, competition, agriculture,
>government procurement, etc.
>
>However... What to make of the fact that nearly half of the 50,000 who
>braved the Seattle police department were Steelworkers and others from the
>AFL-CIO? On the one hand, as Doug points out, they contributed much to the
>Seattle demos and the success of the protest owes much to them. But
>ultimately, their trade agenda is diametrically opposed to the developing
>world's. They want to keep out cheap Third World imports, while the Third
>World wants access to the US market. How do we reconcile the needs -- and
>maintain the rebellious enthusiasm -- of both 1st World *and* 3rd world
>workers?
>
>I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts.
Steelworkers president George Becker was one of the few people at the AFL-CIO rally last Tuesday to sing the nationalist song, with dire invocations of the "imports inundating our shores." Most of the other U.S. union speakers gave at least rhetorical support to the "we are one" line (and not just across national borders, but across the old labor/environmentalist border too).
What do to about it? More contacts, more solidarity. Have American steelworkers meet with Russian & Brazlian steelworkers regularly - not just the leaders meeting in ceremonial rituals, but actual real contacts among workers. That's one idea. Interested to hear more.
Yours in rootless cosmopolitanism,
Doug