To repeat something I've said many times before, as long as politicians are granted the power to pick winners and losers, rig markets, change the way people live their private lives, etc., etc., then the most power-hungry will continue to be the ones attracted to political office.
The US Constitution, and especially the Bill of Rights, had the right idea, but didn't go far enough. There must be very firm limits on what politicians are allowed to do.
They must not be allowed to violate the rights of citizens, no matter how large a vote majority they have.
The origin of the problem is that politicians have too much power, too much discretion.
We need limits on what can be done by government by use of force.
Re: We do not have a general right to experimentation.
I don't want to go too deep down the philosophical rathole, but in my view people have the *right* to do *anything* that does not infringe on the equal rights of others, or pose unreasonable risk of doing so.
There may be experiments that by their nature will infringe on the rights of others, or pose risk of doing so - if I want to "experiment" with nuclear weapons in my backyard, I think it's fair to say my neighbors' rights may be infringed.
But in general if we believe that people should be free, then they have the *right* to *anything*, including any and all experiments.
Provided those actions don't infringe, or pose a reasonable risk of infringing, the equal rights of others.
(Yes, I'm well aware there are many who *do not* think people should be free.)
Many sincere free traders are in favor of the TPP because they think it really promotes free trade.
Maybe that includes the Washington Post editorial board.
Not everyone has been paying attention to the leaks. Based on those it's clear there is a lot of special interest thievery in there, esp. regarding "intellectual property".
Maybe there's also some genuine free trade stuff in there. Maybe not. It's a secret what's in there so we can't tell.
The secrecy was deemed necessary as a way of end-running protectionist special interests. And the ISDS stuff could, maybe, really promote free trade - there are plenty of places with protectionism disguised as legitimate regulation.
The leaks so far seem to indicate the worst.
Have our nominated delegates negotiated a free trade agreement, or have they faithlessly been corrupted by special interests?
Until we can see what's in there, I'm assuming the public has been screwed. Because that's usually what happens when nobody is watching. But I hope I'm wrong.