The funny thing about law is it doesn&#x27;t matter how it&#x27;s meant to be used once it becomes law; power is power.<p>I&#x27;m sure when the trade agreements that allow tobacco companies to determine Australia&#x27;s cigarette laws were signed there were plenty of people saying &quot;oh, no, these laws are only meant for good things. We&#x27;ll only use them when a country specifically targets a specific foreign company. They are for consumer welfare. We promise.&quot;<p>And then this happens:
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;au.news.yahoo.com&#x2F;thewest&#x2F;a&#x2F;29064155&#x2F;tobacco-giant-sues-australia&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;au.news.yahoo.com&#x2F;thewest&#x2F;a&#x2F;29064155&#x2F;tobacco-giant-s...</a><p>Just like when the PATRIOT ACT in the US was passed it was only going to be used for terrorism (Promise! There are legitimate aims!), not for drugs like it is the vast majority of the time today.<p>I think in this case it&#x27;s not a &quot;grotesque simplification&quot; it&#x27;s just stating the facts without running a free PR campaign on behalf of large multinationals.