...Many examples of how WTO has hurt poor people in third world countries were given during the protest. For example, a Pakistani told one panel how, for years, South Africans grew medicinal herbs to treat AIDS at very little cost. The WTO ruled that this was "unfair" competition with pharmaceutical companies seeking to sell their expensive AIDS medications. "People are dying because they cannot afford those products ," he said. A Filipino reported on indigenous farmers being compelled to use fertilizers containing poisonous chemicals in order to compete with cheap, imported potatoes. Ruined, they often left the land seeking survival elsewhere.

But there are many powerful examples right here in the U.S. For starters, consider:

1. WTO policies encourage sub-livable wages for youth of color everywhere including right here.

2. WTO policies encourage PRIVITIZATION of health care, education, welfare, and other crucial public services, as well as cutbacks in those services, so private industry can take them over and run them at a profit. This, along with sub-livable wages, leads to jeopardizing the lives of working-class people and criminalizing youth in particular.

3. Workers in Silicon Valley are being chemically poisoned by the chips they work on that make such wealth for others. WTO doesn't want to limit those profits with protection for workers.

4. WTO has said it is "unfair trade" to ban the import of gasoline in which certain cancer-causing chemicals have been used. This could have a devastating effect on people in the U.S., including those of color, who buy that gas.

Overall, WTO is controlled by U.S. CORPORATIONS. It is secretly run by a few advanced industrialized countries for the benefit of the rich and aspiring rich. WTO serves to further impoverish the poor of all countries.

Armed with such knowledge, we can educate and organize people of color. As Jinee Kim said at a San Francisco report-back by youth of color, "We have to work with people who may not know the word 'globalization' but they live globalization."

I get the impression that people of color are busy doing "local" issues like sweatshops, housing, hunger, slavery, wages, labor organizing, and other things IN AMERICA, while white activists are more into dealing with "global" issues like sweatshops, housing, hunger, slavery, wages, labor organizing, and other things OUTSIDE AMERICA.

I think this is because white activists are more than a little uncomfortable dealing with problems at home, where they (and usually they are middle or upper middle class) are implicated in the creation of poverty.

i think you're right.

at the same time, i also think the preponderance of whiteness in organized global movements is a result of white privilege.

sure, it is sort of gross that white people are, as you say, "more than a little uncomfortable dealing with problems at home, where they (and usually they are middle or upper middle class) are implicated in the creation of poverty" but maybe it is much worse that people of color are often UNcomfortable dealing with problems beyond a narrow focus.

and when people of color who are working for constructive change DO start building really active and powerful solidarity with one another at a national and international level, the state responds very harshly - usually smashing peoples movements into smithereens.

this is a perennial obstacle that we need to get past.

let's put it all together and do it - -

movement growing in detroit

yellow radio in LA

anti-racist protests

a better imc

---------------------------------------------------------------------

anticrisis