Blah, blah blah. Me thinks the good Felicity ought to check out these four publications, each of which offer an alternative to her delusions.

These two are profoundly conservative in the REAL sense of the word,rather than apologists for the inherently UNACCOUNTABLE corporate power such as Felicity.

1. http://www.orionmagazine.org

2. http://www.resurgence.org

I also find this one a convincing anti-dote tp Felicity-speak.

3. http://www.newint.org

This one gives a very much in your face description of the brutal reality behind Felicity's smiling facade.

4. http://www.adbusters.org

Fact: It was precisely the quasi-democratic representative nature of the WTO that made it a focus for protest against the unfair trade practices of wealthy countries: here, for once, legitimate protest had a good chance of being heard and addressed.

Some protestors and left-wing analysts, especially around the time of the Seattle ministerial in 1999, did misguidedly criticise the WTO for its perceived emerging role as a non-elected "world government". Its ability to impose strict trade-related legal conditions on accession certainly did seem to give it a legislative power not typically associated with supranational organisations like the UN.

Fact: Since 1999 any legitimacy the WTO might have had as a supranational governing body evaporated as a result of police suppression of the right to protest.

Fact: the multilateral approach of the WTO has been completely sidelined in favour of numerous bilateral or regional "free trade" agreements where a single rich nation dominates all areas of negotiation.

Fact: This was the norm for free-trade agreements even before the collapse of negotiations at the Cancun ministerial conference in 2003 because rich European and North American countries refused to bow to pressure from poor countries -- able to make a concerted stand in the WTO as nowhere else -- to eliminate agricultural subsidies.

So the countries which stood to lose -- the EU's bigger agricultural exporters and the USA -- have given up pursuing their own trade agendas through the WTO, effectively scuttling it. They now operate their cartel through meetings like G8 which exclude the representatives of the people who suffer from their policies.

The WTO is barely more relevant to the capitalist agenda today than the ILO.

A good article, but the anti-globalisation movement is not going to let facts get in the way of their ideology.

Xoddam points out that multilateralism is being sidelined in favour of bilateral or regional deals. This is exactly what the political opponents of globalisation in Australia - such as One Nation and the Greens - wanted to happen, until they saw how these deals work and who they benefit.

The anti-globalisation lobby has contributed to the political white-anting of the process of dismantling protectionism that represented the best change for poor developing countries to start to grow through trade. The damage done to rich countries such as Australia is significant, the damage to poor countries is inexcusable.

You should be in politics Rhian....

When you can conclusively prove that the WTO has EVER benefited 'poor countries' (prior to them - WTO, being 'white anted') I might take what you say more seriously.

Clearly what you espouse is fact. What you disagree with is 'ideology'. Emmmm...

Imagine that. An entire article on the WTO and not a single mention of the stalled Doha Round. Seven conferences since 2001 and they still can't reach agreement. Not to mention the distinct possiblity that this could spell the end for the WTO entirely.

The anti-globalisation protesters that are the least of the WTO's problems...

Imagine that. An entire article on the WTO and not a single mention of the stalled Doha Round. Seven conferences since 2001 and they still can't reach agreement. Not to mention the distinct possiblity that this could spell the end for the WTO entirely.

The anti-globalisation protesters are the least of the WTO's problems...