|
|
|
|
|
|
by LockAndLol
2023 days ago
|
|
|
That's a false dichotomy used to justify child and slave labor as well as absolve yourself of responsibility. Here's a few options: 1. buy second hand Cheapest and best for the environment 2. buy local stimulates local economy, doesn't give money to another big corporation ready to exploit another country 3. buy fair trade 4. stop buying so many things It really isn't that difficult. ------------ The harsh reality is that we all are to blame for the predicament of those countries and we try to brush it off, just like you just did. We choose to buy cheap without checking where things are from. We choose not to support local industries. We choose politicians that choose not to prosecute companies for crimes in other countries. We choose to give big companies money which they then use to corrupt foreign countries in order to exploit them. We choose to justify our consumerism with "at least I'm giving them a job". You really think that those countries would be in such disarray without our involvement? Do you think if multi-nationals had less power, the support of their western politicians and populace, that they'd be able to mess around in foreign countries and take away opportunities for the foreign populace? |
|
|
It's clearly not a false dichotomy, since 3 of those options will leave those in the working in the global poor worse off. Buying fair trade will help those in the global poor, so that's a good option.
Note that I did not use this to justify slave labour. That's obviously bad, and they will be better off not working under slave labour. We should refuse to buy goods produced from slave labour. I am specifically focusing on those who work "voluntarily"[0] in exchange for pay.
> we try to brush it off, just like you just did.
Did you read my comment? I said, "Now, the ideal situation is just a direct wealth transfer from rich countries to poor countries, and I would be in favor of that." How is that brushing it off? I advocated for giving them money/aid/etc. directly (and is something I do on a small scale personally, by donating to charities that help people in the global poor).
What it comes down to at the end is that these people are working these jobs because the alternative is starvation or the like. If you're saying we should stop buying from them (indirectly, through a large company), you need to pair that with a direct transfer of some form of aid to make up for the lost income. Otherwise, you are directly making them worse off. Before, they earned some money for their labour, now they don't.
> The harsh reality is that we all are to blame for the predicament of those countries
If we're to blame, we can't just tell them "Sorry, I know you need this income to sustain yourself, but I'm not comfortable with those working conditions, so I'm going to give my money to someone in a first world country instead."
[0] - Ie. They decided they are better off working this job, than not working this job.