Last year around this time, Nathan George from Trade as One spoke here in Concord. He made a compelling (and overwhelming) case for rethinking consumer habits. In his estimation, the majority of clothes worn in the room that night were products of an exploitative manufacturing system; a system in which workers often labored for un-livable wages and at times labored for no pay at all. He told stories of children who would work the rest of their lives to pay a man who loaned their parents money at an interest rate that was impossible for them to pay back.
Shortly after the the Trade As One event, I overheard this conversation between two men who had attended:
A. Did you like it?
B. I don’t know if I liked it but it was really powerful. What’d you think?
A. I thought it was unrealistic.
B. You mean, you don’t think those things happen with kids?
A. No, I guess that part happens… It’s just really frustrating, you know? I mean.. as if I’m supposed to rifle through all my drawers and closets to see which of my clothes was made by slaves. I’d have to change everything.
B. Right. But I think that’s the point. We have to live differently now.
The more I learn about modern day slavery, the more I find my fingerprints all over the crime scene. The fact that I am either ignorant of or comfortable with the cost of my consumer comforts is what sets the stage for nine-year-old girls to be trafficked for sex; the bottom line being that my way of life is worth whatever it costs someone else. The line between directly using someone for instant gratification and indirectly using someone so that I can pay less for products is nowhere near as thick as I once thought.
Nathan George’s challenge is to take this connection seriously. If I want to participate in the redemptive, healing arc of justice, seeing people set free from a life of slavery, it will cost me to do so. I cannot just live my life and then, at times, do justice because I can’t just do justice, I have to live it. When Sara and Troy Groves heard about the work of IJM to bring rescue to victims of slavery, sexual exploitation and other forms of violent oppression, they approached founder Gary Haugen and asked “What can we do?” Gary responded “Become a person of Justice.”
Man B is right. Did Nathan George offer any tips as to resources for determining what companies to buy from, etc?
Yes, he did. Nathan runs Trade As One and they deal in slave free goods. His site is below. Also below are resources for researching products. Nothing is entirely comprehensive but these are very helpful.
http://tradeasone.com/
http://www.betterworldshopper.com/
http://www.free2work.org/
Thanks! I’ve been a fan of betterworldshopper — glad to ind the other two sites!
You’re welcome, Jennifer.
er, find . . .
Given the previous lengthy comment discussion, I feel compelled to assure you that I am not a troll.
That said, I have some skepticism about this topic. I’m all for fair labor practices and I firmly believe that we should all support business (and people) who behave ethically and shun those who do not. However, I bristle at the use of words like, “slavery.” It seem like quite frequently when we hear of modern slavery, injustice or exploitation, subsequent reporting reveals a much more complicated and nuanced story. Apple computers and the Foxconn assembly plant come to mind most recently. Putting the Mike Daisey fiasco aside, the major substantiated claim against Foxconn was a relentless work schedule and that they were not adhering to labor laws limiting the work day and hours worked per week. As it turns out, many factory workers depended on that extra income they earned from overtime:
http://www.imore.com/2012/03/30/foxconn-workers-not-happy-about-overtime-hours-being-cut/
I am convinced that there are examples of legitimate exploitation (and have witnessed some myself), but honestly I seldom come across a truly vetted example. More often than not, these examples feel more like Western guilt than true exploitation. It’s possible that buying cheep T-shirts paves the way to child sex slavery, but it’s also possible that buying cheep T-shirts helps a very poor family put food on the table.
Trolls don’t have that much nuance.
BTW, I have no idea what a cheep T-shirt is… must be something for birders. I meant cheap.
“buying cheap T-shirts paves the way to child sex slavery, but it’s also possible that buying cheep T-shirts helps a very poor family put food on the table.”
Both things are true, which makes the dilemma incredibly messy.
“I seldom come across a truly vetted example.”
I come across them often, actually.. having a lot of friends working in the field. The nuances of each situation do make simple definitions ineffective in one sense, but the general horror I’ve become aware of leads me to be comfortable with blanket terms like “slavery” or “forced labor.”
Yeah. It seems to me that if people must work insane hours because they need the money to survive, that they aren’t being paid enough to begin with — and that is part of the slavery.
Jennifer, this is what I’m talking about. I agree that there are parallels and it’s a decent place to start a discussion, but I don’t think Chinese laborers are enslaved. At worst, it might be considered some systemic form of indentured servitude, but is probably just more symptomatic of an economy emerging from industrialization. I do think slavery happens, but this isn’t it. Poverty is not the same thing as slavery.
Part of me wonders if it might not be one of the worst forms of slavery — because it cannot be easily labeled as such. i DO think that creating a system where people need to give their entire lives to you (when you work long hours in labor-intense jobs, you don’t have much left when you go home) in order to barely survive while your (the employer, not you personally) wealth increases on their hardship is a form of slavery. That employer might not own the worker in a literal sense, but I see very little difference for the worker who has no other choice. The laborer may request more hours, but when it is because they aren’t paid a living wage for their regular hours, that isn’t exactly ‘voluntary.” It is wrong. And yes, I’m willing to call it slavery.
Jennifer, you seem very smart, but I think you and I have an entirely different view of the world. I don’t think we will ever see eye to eye on this. I could not disagree with your last post more.
“That employer might not own the worker in a literal sense, but I see very little difference for the worker who has no other choice.” That’s just it. They do have a choice. These workers travel great distances to work at places like Foxconn. The factory offers them an opportunity previously unavailable. If they are not literally owned by their employer, then they are not (by definition) a slave. If the movement to end “modern slavery” conflates employers with slave masters, then I want no part. It all seems a bit Orwellian at best. At worst, dictating the terms of service for an industry like that is likely to stifle productivity and retard China’s progress into post-industrialization.
If a laborer voluntarily comes to work, and requests more hours of labor, is that “forced labor” and/or “slavery?”
Thanks for scratching that Kingdom itch. Byron Borger says hello.