Anonymous ID: 89f733 Sept. 4, 2020, 5:08 p.m. No.10531030   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Should we give up on global governance?

 

https://bruegel.org/reader/global_governance

 

Introduction

Flash back to 1995. After an eight-decades-long split, the world economy was in the process of being reunified. To manage an ever-growing degree of interdependence, the global community had initiated a process aimed at strengthening the existing international institutions and creating new ones. The World Trade Organisation (WTO) had just been brought to life, equipped with a binding dispute-resolution mechanism that would, among other things, provide an effective channel for managing China’s transition from a closed, planned economy to an open economy that plays by the rules of global markets. A new round of multilateral trade negotiations was in preparation. The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) was being negotiated under the aegis of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The creation of a global competition system was contemplated. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) would soon be given a broader mandate to oversee cross-border capital flows. A legally binding international agreement, the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, was being negotiated, and plans were drawn for an international environment organisation that would provide a fifth pillar to the global order, alongside the WTO, the Bretton Woods institutions, and the (less effective) International Labour Organisation (ILO). There were strong hopes that the institutional architecture of globalisation was being built.

 

The intended message to the people was clear: globalisation—a new concept at the time—was not just about liberalising flows of goods, services and capital. It was also about establishing the rules and public institutions required to steer markets, foster cooperative behaviour on the part of governments, and manage a single global economy. Global public goods—another new concept that was loosely applied to a series of issues from biodiversity to climate and from public health to financial stability—would be taken care of through jointly agreed rules of the game. The successful Montreal Protocol on eliminating ozone-depleting gases, agreed in 1987, provided an encouraging template.

Anonymous ID: 89f733 Sept. 4, 2020, 5:10 p.m. No.10531069   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1135

How active citizenship can strengthen democracy

 

https://engage2.com.au/active-citizenship-can-strengthen-democracy/

 

Active citizenship involves two elements. One is the ‘see something, do something’ model of do-ocracy, where citizens participate in their communities by identifying problems and creating solutions rather than falling into ‘complain-cency’.

 

“The second element involves listening to other people, reading information and checking your bias, because it’s not your democracy, it’s our democracy,” says Amelia Loye, Managing Director of engage2.

 

“If you see a problem, do something, but don’t do it on your own or in a little bubble where you’re not looking at the rest of the world and collaborating with others.”

 

In traditional models of representative democracy, four pillars support democracy. These include the judiciary, bureaucracy, legislature and media, which deliver democracy’s driving forces of justice, equity, representation and information respectively.

 

But recent elections in the US and the referendum in the UK have led to much water-cooler talk about the failure of representative democracy.

Anonymous ID: 89f733 Sept. 4, 2020, 5:25 p.m. No.10531236   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>10531135

 

What's pathetic is that the Silent Majority

Does not take citizenship seriously

And is not more vocal at providing guidance

To elected politicians

The reason the Cabal is so successful

Is because the Silent Majority just shits up

And complies!

 

Silent No More! is the 5th pillar