Fait accompli

Moan all you want, but we are just going to have to take ACTA up the wrong 'un.

Civil Servant: Minister, here is the first ACTA related bill for you to sign and make law.

MP: Some of this seems a bit off; a bit much.

CS: Negotiations went on for years minister. Everyone agrees.

MP: Oh, why wasn't I there?

CS: Secret negotiations minister.

MP: So who was there?

CS: The stakeholders minister and few representatives for the interested countries.

MP: "Stakeholders"? What, members of the public?

CS: No minister, the MAFIAA and other groups.

MP: So why do I have to sign this?

CS: It's all been agreed. The whole world agrees on it. if you don't sign it, we will never get an agreement like this again. You'll be against free trade. No one will trade with us.

MP: And what will it mean?

CS: Continued profits for the members of MAFIAA et al. But you can dress it up as "Less pirates selling porn to kiddies". The Daily Hate will love that.

MP: Won't there be public outcry?

CS: Not really, we'll do it bit by bit. Then in a few years we will just say the new ACTA bill simply harmonises and streamlines what we already have in place.

MP: Really can't see the public liking this.

CS: As you often say minister "Fuck the proles, show me the money". You will, of course be invited to all the upcoming ACTA conferences around the globe. First class travel, the works. I am sure you could be head of a few steering committees or the director of a consultancy related to this as well. You won't even have to declare it as an "interest"; I'll see to that.

MP: Jolly good! Where do I sign?

Representatives of the people

ACTA: the most brazen example yet of how, even in "democracies", governments are not for the people, but instead represent the chums of those who have elbowed their way to the top. Remember that, next time some corrupt EU commissioner or MP tries to push through their business-friendly legislation under the pretext that it "protects jobs" or is for the "good of society". For them, "good of society" means "good for their offshore bank balance" and little more.

To victory!

"The talks have been exciting conspiracy theorists for months, not least because they are expected to result in personal copyright infringement being classed as counterfeiting. "

Oooooh I like that! Especially since someone told me that counterfeiting was morally wrong (but not the same as copyright infringement). Onwards!

I can't see what everyone is complaining about

What's the problem? They are quite clearly arranging to give the public Royal treatment.

If it was good enough for Edward the Second, it's good enough for you.

Remember

The Man always wins, always.