chris mann on Wed, 14 Apr 1999 09:04:46 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Sender: [email protected] |
Nato and the militarisation of the Euro. It's the same strategy as was employed against the Soviets, to use armaments as a way of defining the economy. There are now 19 members of Nato, nearly all of them current or soon-to-be members of the European Union and they all need standardized weapons systems and that's a lot of weapons procurement. The corollary of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment is the free movement of people, but the economics of government is to lose refugees, not win them and the EU is about diminishing the responsibility of individual states for foreign affairs and the economy. European foreign policy has been sold to Nato and Nato is an industry specific MAI. Thus, Kosovo, not Rwanda. Or East Timor. Or the Kurds. There is no trade embargo against Serbia. If there is to be no free movement of people while there is increasing freedom for capital, wouldn't it be reasonable to have an electoral system where, for example, everyone has five votes which they can spend on the countries of their choice, a sort of participatory UN? --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: [email protected]