Re: [microsound] RE: McLabor(ot) (ot)

[Joshua Schrei <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>  but Nike, Reebok arent to blame
> for the social woes of the contries they set up their factories in.

well, thats not entirely true either. when companies pay off governments
specifically to keep them from developing labor laws, then in my book they
are partly responsible. when they ditch countries (like korea) as soon as
they develop labor unions, then it sets a pretty nasty precedent. Bottom
line is there's a lot of room for improvement, and that's all most
organizers are asking for. I'm not going to make some blanket proclamation
about all corporations or whatever, but I am going to find those specific
instances where companies perpetuate abuses and hold them accountable for
those abuses. 

 >We also
> have to remember that the conditions and choices many of these people are
> left with are zero to none, so they are actaully thanksfull even for what we
> consider deplorable working conditions,enviroments.

that is very true. but its also important to look at how those countries got
in those situations to begin with. A lot of the devastation/famine that we
now think of as the 'normal' state of India/Africa was brought about in the
19th century and stems directly from colonialism. Interestingly enough, as
countries like Belgium were ransacking places like the Congo for rubber and
raw materials (killing 10 million people in the process) they were taking a
public line very similar to what corporations say today: "free trade will
benefit the natives." "We have to be in there, those people are so backward
and poor."  that history is very important to understanding the distrust
indigenous communities... and then later activists... have toward
corporations.

a book called "king Leopold's Ghost" is good reading on the matter.


anyway, back to blips, hisses, and pops... :)
> 

--Boundary_(ID_f03BoOUSBDxLuNA+Vc9Jlg)
Content-Type: message/rfc822; Name="Re: [microsound] RE: McLabor(ot) (ot)"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit