Being the enabler...

[KontanKarite]

Recently, I was given an interesting thought about conscientious buying and being a smart, positive consumer.

Naturally, being that I oppose certain brands and companies for their abuses to their employees and use of child labor, I would feel morally obligated to boycott those companies.

BUT, then, I was given the idea that to boycott a company that uses child labor is essentially denying a child their ability to get food for example. A child went hungry in some way because I decided that it was my moral duty to deny the company that uses them as a means of producing goods.

And it got me thinking. Does my singular boycotting do anything?

If we were all to say... boycott Nike, would it really change the fact that children are being used for production? That source of income would be gone and in that, would starve.

And it got me wondering as to how you actually do the right thing when everyone is so dependent on a system of trade that to deviate and not contribute to it implies that someone else may suffer from your inaction.

What are your thoughts?

[HumanePain]

To put it in perspective, think of it this way: what were children's lives like before Nike?

Their parents fed and clothed them somehow, sure, maybe they didn't have even half the material things that children in developed countries had, but they had childhoods they could enjoy, playing and spending time with mother etc.

Then Nike came around and robbed them of their childhood, so now they spend time in a factory instead of with family.

So in my opinion, boycott the child slave masters and you free the children to go back to pre-Nike lives, poor as that may seem.

[LiUsAiDh]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

To put it in perspective, think of it this way: what were children's lives like before Nike?

Their parents fed and clothed them somehow, sure, maybe they didn't have even half the material things that children in developed countries had, but they had childhoods they could enjoy, playing and spending time with mother etc.

Farm labourers in the countryside, according to my old geography textbook anyway.

I don't know if we can help.

[Sir Canvas Corpsey]

I love it when people finally spot the problems in boycotting companies that use cheap labour and unfair trade. Now that no one buys their products they're losing money and have less reason to pay the person 75c so now the person gets 25c or they don't have a job.

I'm surprised a lot of people don't see this already, another example of this, is boycotting say... a chicken company to stop cruelty against animals. If a certain percentile of the population stopped buying, the company would have to raise it's prices and thus so would the fast food place, let's say... KFC. Now that prices have risen less people may pay and so they lose more customers and will pay their employees less and while the big cheese are going to lose more money, the small fry like teenagers getting their start aren't going to left alone.

Essentially we're told by certain groups that boycotting will allows us in one single and fell stroke to stop all these negative things. The truth we need to boycott a company into economic disarray and further, thus screwing over those at the bottom of the ladder whom we're often trying to help. It's only once we do this that we can then force the company to re-establish in a more desirable and humane direction.

I say fuck-it-all and buy what I buy, I singularly do not have the power to change the world and the way people work, if I do come across such a power in my years I will most likely use it. I also do not want to carry the moral burden during the economic disruption and destruction period with the company, the specific burden of how it affects the innocents in the situation, which are usually children, and why should I have the right to push them around like pawns.

That and companies don't die overnight, if one starts to die it may just be bought out by another, and customers can be stubborn or like me, morally disgusted by the problem but definitively human in the fact they can ignore the pain till it touches them in some manner.

/endCCrant

[KontanKarite]

But then you see, this is the inherent clash of cultures.

So in the west, we HAVE what we think is best for us, childhoods.

What I'm getting at is that we are projecting our own self righteousness upon a culture that doesn't cleave to our idea of right and wrong.

It honestly makes me wonder, what exactly does those children feel they're doing without?

I remember when my mother was raising me. She would NOT teach me about Santa. She did not give me that fantasy of a big ol' red jolly man giving me presents if I was a good boy. She gave me the truth and implored me to not share this truth to other children. I, do not regret knowing the magic fantasy of Santa.

How can I be so righteous as to decide that what I feel to be right for me is right for everyone?

[Sir Canvas Corpsey]

Well they certainly can't decide to have a revolution of any sort as it is most likely that America will stick its arm in where it doesn't belong and intervene for the "greater good" and thus intensify the problem by using its situation specialty: guns and military action.

The thing about your question is that there is no definitive clean cut answer available, unless we can poll every worker there and ask what they want then we have no idea how it will work for them. I say just follow your gut moral inclination.

If you feel that you do want them to enjoy healthy western style of living or even their equivalent of such a thing then I implore you to research and explore the possibilities and make your move instead of pissing over uncertainties. You still have a right to offer them a chance at a western life and what is right for you, it is an opportunity for them regardless of how apparently egotistical and righteous it may seem, thus they can decide if they want what is right for them.

Who, when and how you do that, well you have to figure that out yourself.

[KontanKarite]

But the crux is, is right and wrong absolute or arbitrary?

We speak of Western life as if it's quintessentially the best way to live.

I however disagree. I do believe in improving a quality of life or helping someone get to what they think is a better place for them, but without the proper data, I can't really make that choice. I am at the moment in a state of stalemate.

Did you know that those piracy companies in the east abuse their workers for not selling enough pirated copies of entertainment? They can get their fingers chopped off for not doing a good enough job.

There in lies yet another problem. Do you respect the artist and give them what they deserve for payment or do you buy a pirated copy of something to save a guy's fingers?

[LiUsAiDh]

http://www.icftu.org/focus.asp?Issue...ur&Language=EN

There's always charity.

And in my googleing, I also found this, which is possibly/probably worse than Nike.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/as...0011999en.html

[Sir Canvas Corpsey]

There's no telling if my buying of a real copy over a pirate one is going to be the straw that broke the camels back, or in this case, the dollar that lopped a guy's fingers off. In that case I generally respect and pay homage to the artist themselves and hope a little that they'll use their riches to help out people in this situation in some way or another.

To properly improve and amend the problems in the lives of those who we believe are less fortunate than us and seek help, we need to indentify each individuals problem and solve it, an economically impractical way to do it, but if you want to be Goodwill Humanitarian (this is a statement open to all readers) then go ahead, but it'll be a hell of a lot harder than just inflecting our social system and life styles onto another set of people.

Part of the problem is people want quick fixes and ones where they don't lose any really money or are put into the moral firing line, which is why I believe a lot of people just say:

"oh, Cadbury isn't fair trade, I'll just stop eating it and buy another brand and that'll solve all the problems"

I may be exaggerating but the point remains.

I may be running circles around myself in this discussion, because from your responses it seems that you are interpreting what I'm saying as the same thing over, or deviating from the intention of the discussion which is not what I intend.

[Solumina]

To be honest it is quite difficult to be a conscientious consumer, the only thing that you seem to be able to be conscientious about without any complications is to try and be environmentally conscious, essentially everything else has some catch.

[electrosexual]

Contrary to popular belief, the answer is not to boycott these brands, but rather campaign for change. Write to these brands, let them know how you feel.

[LiUsAiDh]

Originally Posted by electrosexual

Write to these brands, let them know how you feel.

I know if a lot of people do it, it can't hurt, but Nike isn't really going to bother if one pissed off goff writes a snotty letter to them. They're not going to write off their entire industry and profit.

[electrosexual]

It's not about "one pissed off goff". It's like reducing carbon emissions, a group effort. One more person just adds to the cause.

[kikrox]

at least you're questioning these things ! good job !

[Noirette]

If you had thought of any possible consequence of everything you do, you would just end up doing absolutely nothing.

Do whatever feels right to you. I think that what electrosexual suggested is quite a good idea. If you will try this, I would be glad to take part in it too. This unfair slavery and the western baptism angered me today.