Brunei is a TPP nation. It has the death penalty for gay people.

[cali]

The administration has consistently touted that the tpp elevates human rights. Death by stoning is the penalty for homosexuality there. enacted last year, it shows just how much weight the tpp has on human rights. And what the hell is the market there anyway? It has a tiny population.

Oh, and children don't care so well, particularly girls. Not that great for women either.

[el_bryanto]

1. I don't know too much about Brunei

Seems like an Islamic nation - the state religion is Islam - and it is more conservative than it's neighbor nations. Alcohol is largely prohibited, for example. The media is largely controlled by the state.

Perhaps the argument is that by tying Brunei's economy more tightly into other nations, they will be exposed to more progressive cultures and will see alternatives, which will lead the people to demand more freedom.

I don't know if that's practical or not - but that may be the thinking.

Bryant

[Kurska]

8. The thinking is money

Human rights are window dressing to get progressives on board. So are the supposed environmental benefits.

In the end trade deals are about making money for that nation, nothing more and nothing less. Anything else is just a side act.

[el_bryanto]

16. I disagree with that analysis

That may be true of TPP - but to say that that is the only purpose that Trade deals can serve is not accurate. Trade Deals are a tool of international diplomacy; they are often used badly, and in the United States they are most often used to benefit the corporations at the expense of the people, but that doesn't mean they don't have a roll.

Bryant

[still_one]

2. we will see exactly what the final TPP agreement contains soon enough when it is made public before

the vote

[cali]

4. keep the faith. trust the President

[still_one]

6. Typical. Where did I say I trust the President or like the agreement? You have a tendency to jump

to conclusions don't you

I just said that the TPP agreement is going to be made public before the vote, and there will be ample time fight against it, and persuade our Senators and Congress people to vote it down.

[SomethingFishy]

18. Like the Patriot Act? And all its revisions?

Please. A bunch of interns and assistants might actually read the whole bill, if we are extremely lucky. The votes will go which every way the bargains are made to make the votes go. No one on the Hill gives a flying fuck who this bill hurts, they only care about how their vote is going to help them.

[still_one]

19. Big difference. First of all this is a trade agreement. Second, there are Democrats who currently

have expressed reservations about it.

[treestar]

10. That is not what still one said .

Not at all.

I trust the President more than the pundits that haven't seen it. I do not believe he is deliberately trying to sabotage the 99%. He believes it will help them. Disagree with him on that I might do when I see the thing, though it will be difficult as my understanding of economics is not that great. But I think Obama's is.

That's just life. We do it every day. so it's unfair making it out to be some sort of blind trust, blah blah.

[geek tragedy]

3. But, oil, nt

[djean111]

5. Maybe Brunei will be making it easier or cheaper for a corporation to set up a subsidiary there,

or something like that.

I don't know how anyone can claim a trade agreement is going to enforce making human rights and worker conditions better, with a straight face.

[gollygee]

7. I suppose the argument would be

that they can make a rule that in order to have the benefits of free trade, you have to meet certain human rights standards?

Although I sincerely doubt that would happen. Look how cozy we are with Saudi Arabia. And from what I've seen of trade agreements, they bring the top down much more than they bring the bottom up. Certainly that's what we've seen with workers' compensation and workplace protections, and the environment. If we want to compete, we have to compromise on those things. I don't know if human rights violations affect corporations' bottom lines, but I still don't see us suddenly making demands about human rights for some countries when we are very friendly with other countries which have human rights problems.

[treestar]

9. We don't generally use boycotting sanctions over that

It appears to take a certain level, like Iraq and WMD.

Then there is the argument that boycotting them hurts their poorer people. And their gay people.

Isolating them as a nation probably won't work to make them come up to snuff on Human rights though. If it did, NK would have improved a long time ago. In fact the greater contact with the world is what is more likely to get them to move forward on it.

[cali]

11. is there any evidence to support

that human rights have been improved anywhere due to ftas?

[treestar]

14. Now that you're on this mode of attack

there isn't much evidence to show that boycotting them works either. North Korea does not improve. In fact, the isolation lets them make an alternate reality for their people.

I'm going kind of on common sense. More contact with the rest of the world would mean less isolated shrinkage into a country's worst tendencies. And make their flaws more available to the world.

And none of this has anything to do with desirability or not of this trade agreement. We've already been condemned for our alliances with places like Saudi Arabia. Yet we don't boycott them. Not until they have WMD or might seems to be the standard.

[cali]

15. its not boycotting and I fail to see the common sense you claim

Ar

[treestar]

21. I won't take that bait

about your lack of common sense. But it doesn't apply to the TPP. You could say we should boycott them along with Saudi Arabia and other such countries, and that would make sense. Excluding them from the TPP as far as you'd be seeing it would be good for them, since the TPP is so terrible.

[jeff47]

17. Yeah, South Africa still has Mandela in jail because "boycotts" don't work.

Oh wait! That story is a wee bit different.

North Korea does not improve because nobody wants to own North Korea. There are very few resources that are not more easily dug up elsewhere, so the US and other capitalist-focused countries are not interested.

China props it up as a buffer to South Korea.

South Korea's military could conquer North Korea easily, but would take heavy damage to Seoul. And then they'd own North Korea. So they're not interested in "fixing" it.

The lack of change in North Korea is due to neglect.

[treestar]

20. Then maybe the boycott lack on Saudi Arabia is because

of the oil, as in we can't afford it. I don't know. Seems the first place to boycott as far as their human rights goes.

You could have pointed out the S.A. example without the snakiness.

It took years too, and may not have been the only factor.

[Zorra]

12. We should simply end trade with all of these fascist nations.

Hate your own citizens, you lose, game over.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. You will find that LGBT organizations and Democrats have been pressing hard on Brunei and also

by the way, Malaysia in regard to TPP for some time. The materials you posted about Doctors Without Borders' objections to TPP connect with the concerns of the LGBT community as well, as access to medicines is an important issue out our way as well. Same concerns, for the same reasons.
I don't dare mention such things on DU because so much of the membership here insists that 'social issues' and 'economic issues' are very distinct and they insist on having fights when anyone suggests that might not be a very accurate perception of reality.

But here's an article from a couple of months back that gets into it a bit. Some folks have been actually doing stuff for sometime about all of this....

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/02/20/lgbt-members-congress-question-u-s-trade-agreement/