It is argued that the Battle of Seattle is very much fascinating in a number of ways, one most common one would be that the host city, Seattle, was famously known for being politically liberal but during the third World Trade Organisation (WTO) ministerial conference that was held in Washington Seattle, the conference was met up by a series of protesters that argued for their grievances against Neoliberal globalisation and the institutions that govern it (Lichbach, Almeida: 2002). The WTO was meeting to discuss various trading rules for the global market but with that it was overshadowed by massive street protest with the coalition of environmental, students, labour, economic justice, religious and other activists that marched against the WTO meeting that was taking place and the demonstration displayed were people sitting, marching, and blocking various intersections, that will prevent the delegates to getting to the conference venue, but only a small number of protesters looted and vandalised corporate and financial targets (Lichbach, Almeida: 2002) this protest was marked as a major resurgence in the United States protests movements and was seen as the second phase of the Anti-Globalisation movement in America. This essay will be looking into critically outlining the Battle of Seattle, firstly I will look into the WTO and its policies and how they affect the political sphere by assessing the grievance’s outlined by the protesters against the World Trade Organisation and then we will be looking into the strategies used by the protesters and how they fit into the Global civil Society by looking if they serve the global society and if it is a globalisation movement and if it did impact on the conference and beyond. Body
The world trade organisation was founded as an extension to the General agreement on tariffs and trade to provide framework for institutional conduct on trade negotiations amongst a number of trading nations and also ratifies in their respective parliaments , thus meaning it supervises and liberalise international trade by helping the producers of goods and services, importers and exporters to smoothly conduct their intended businesses (Murphy: 2004) one of their main policy is nation members in the organisations are required to have non discriminative trade relationships with other members involved, in other words it disallows historical trade relationships and other things that are specifically made for trading goods and services. The WTO have policies based on the improving living standards, by cutting the living cost, thus giving the people the choice to choose amongst a variety of goods and services, and it also aims to help nations settle disputes and reduce trade tensions, that is way the policies placed are there to monitor and supervise the trading, the WTO system is there to help stimulate growth, development and employment within the countries that are trading, these model is based on the neoliberal version of international of economics, thus decreasing the public sector in favour of the private sector and help increase of the economy role that emphasises on the non-intervention from the government by rejecting the regulation of markets (Murphy: 2004; Levi, Olson: 2000; Lichbach, Almeida: 2002). Because of the WTO trade policies, it can be argued they influence trade policies of different autonomous nation states, making trade policies not only a national issue, all in the name of multilateral, for instance in Germany when the government wanted to increase their taxes on corporation big corporations threatened to leave the country and seek lucrative countries to invest in or move their factories to, arguably the third world countries (Hertz: 2001) this can be caused by the fact that trade policies of the WTO support the ideal of unregulated trade, giving corporation to increasingly govern the public realm, “unregulated or under-regulated by government, corporations set the terms of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document