The Joy of Sweatshops
A historically-challenged anarcho-capitalist (okay, that should go without saying) decided to take some of his precious time trying to educate me about the real world and why unregulated capitalism is soooo wonderful. I would like you to especially take note of this “Libertarian’s” laughably insincere concern for the poor sweatshop-less people of Cambodia.
Okay–now that you’ve had your say, will you listen to a staunch anarcho-capitalist? If yes, I would like to start you off with a great article from (of all places) Nick Kristof at the New York Times, entitled “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream.” Watch the video attached, read the article, and ask me questions if you wish.
But just remember a few maxims underpinning libertarian thought: 1) Poverty cannot be cured through force of arms or government decree–only by independent business. 2) Wealth is the foundation for all businesses except multinational conglomerates with sweet government contracts. Redistribution hurts everyone _except_ the Monsantos and Halliburtons. 3) The only power governments have military, and the only money they have is other people’s money. 4) Subsidizing an enterprise with ‘government’ money is no different than when identity thieves buy jet-skis with your credit card–it’s theft, pure and simple.
Next time you want to talk about capitalism being about “controlling and hurting other people,” remember that capitalism is the only thing keeping you from living a terribly harsh subsistence-agrarian lifestyle, such as the vast majority of humans on this planet must endure. Perhaps if the mother of that article had been in a more capitalist country, her son wouldn’t have been backed over by a garbage truck looking for scrap plastic. It’s rather hypocritical to mock the very thing that allows you and I to maintain such an expensive and comfortable existence, isn’t it?
This is my response.
Thank you for taking the time out of your day to educate me on the harsh reality (which apparently you inhabit 24/7) outside of my little utopian fairytale. I have a few humble comments about your enlightening and historically-accurate interpretation of how the world works. First, I’ll start with your list:
1) Poverty cannot be cured through force of arms or business—which continue to exacerbate it—or government decree, though that can make a huge difference. Poverty can only be cured by local communities taking responsibility for their people’s welfare.
2) Wealth is the foundation of all businesses. Period. Multinational conglomerates may have sweet government contracts, but that is still wealth. The problem with our system isn’t whether or not businesses are founded on wealth; it is that wealth in this economy is based on wage labour and the exploitation of the poor. Redistribution doesn’t “hurt” anyone. If I tell a child to share a toy with their friend, is that hurting them?
3) The only power that Objectivists want governments to have are through the military and criminal law. These are the two reasons why governments are so dangerous in the first place. Take away the military and criminal law, and all they can do is serve the people. You essentially have an anarchist society.
4) Subsidizing an already enormous enterprise through government money is completely unnecessary, but that’s what gets subsidies. Subsidizing a small business gives them the leverage they need in a competitive environment. Otherwise, the most ruthless competitors (AKA the ones that exploit humans and the environment the most) would have the upper hand…as they do today. So wouldn’t taking subsidies away from large corporations even the playing field? Yes, in the same way that cutting my hair would bring me closer to the height of an infant.
Aww yes, those poor people living in landfills. That must be because they aren’t working in wonderful sweatshops! Please learn a little history. Have those people been living in landfills for hundreds of years? Are they the People of the Landfill, whose simple culture has been waiting forever for a chance to work sixteen hours a day absorbing toxins through the air and passing out from exhaustion? Or is it perhaps related to the industrial revolution, or Western countries ravaging Third-World nations’ resources at the expense of the majority of the people on Earth? Such a simplistic view of labour is reserved only for the economist (who is taught from a young age to have tunnel-vision and accept economics as a “hard science”), and the Objectivist (who agrees with Rand that Native Americans deserved to be destroyed due to their primitive economic systems). That’s exactly how this mess started: Westerners destroyed the land that other societies lived on, and massacred indigenous people, so now they cannot hunt and gather or develop small farms; instead they must become intentional slaves.
Perhaps if you wish to understand the real reason why Cambodians are in such a bad way they’re willing to work in sweat shops, you will read this.
And now for my favourite: Capitalism is keeping us from living a “terribly harsh” subsistence-agrarian lifestyle. Let’s look at that for a second, shall we? People who live subsistence lives tend to be the happiest, most fulfilled people in the world. If African nations still used subsistence agriculture, they wouldn’t have any of the problems they have today (as a result of their subsistence lifestyles being forcefully transformed into cash-cropping and exports-based agriculture). No, the harsh existence that most people on this planet endure is directly caused by capitalism and imperialism, and is due to the fact that subsistence living has been all but destroyed globally. I hope that one day everyone will realize that the only way to combat poverty and environmental destruction is to grow your own food.
By the way, I live in an ecovillage community. We grow our own food here. We look after each other. And—whaddaya know!—we like it.
Words in bold italics are defined in the glossary.
Like this:
~ by sitakali on 30 October, 2009.
Posted in Bullshit Review, Social Environmentalist
Tags: anarchism, capitalism, class, conservative jackasses, culture, economics, environmentalism, food, history, local communities, poor, socialism, society
Ah, I see you caught yourself a fine example of a vulgar libertarian. It seems that it’s a classic one, making the very common sounds of it’s species.
Thanks. I’ll link to that in my post.
My favorite part of your response:
“Have those people been living in landfills for hundreds of years? Are they the People of the Landfill, whose simple culture has been waiting forever for a chance to work sixteen hours a day absorbing toxins through the air and passing out from exhaustion?”
Pure gold
Yer sweet :*
i agree with you. there is enough for everyone’s need, but not everyone’s greed. great work. thanks. there should be a quality of the workplace and everyone should be able to have basic needs to live. working in sweat shops is the same as treating them as slaves. letting them work in sweat shops is better then letting the starve, but both are bad.
since i learned about people are starveing, the 1st thought i had was, how can there land/earth be fixed so they can grow there own food. the land had to be the obvoius problem why they couldnt grow there own food. each community, each area should have enough food to feeds its own people.
i would wonder, why would people buy food from across seas, when they could grow it in there town or back yard? they would say its cheaper to buy from across seas. well how is that possible, considering its free to grow on your own land, and in a town, if you have enough farmers to grow enough food for the town, then you wouldnt have to pay for shipping and handeling. local food is much safer because then you know where it comes from.
but they say its cheaper to buy over seas because usa companies can pay workers that will work for a cheaper salery. money is not equal, money is not just, it is just someone’s word, and does not place what an item is really worth. money should not determine wheather someone lives or dies.
it would be better if money was more accurate at what something was really worth, but money is not. money is like a game, you play for fun, but it doesnt have any rules. it shouldnt determine wheather someone gets fed or not. its good for people to make trades, but tradeing your self and your children to be prostituted, just so you can drink clean water and eat. all people should always be able to have enough food and water to live. but the human race should stop growing its population. we should not populated anymore people then is needed to retain our 7 billion population. i dont want to see the population rise over 7 billion. we need to leave parts of the world untouched so that we can have forests and natural life.
if people want to trade anything for anything, thats fine as long as it is not hurting anyone. haveing more then what you need, hurts people. the world is over croweded. i’d like people to stop getting pregnate so much, so the population doesnt grow anymore. it would be nice if each person had enough land to feed themselfs. in a small commnity, if ya want to have a town garden/farm, as long as its in walking distance, that would be good. then yal could have free food.
makeing friends with your neighbors will help decrease the crime rates. and if ya could walk more and exersize more that would be good.
sometimes its cheaper to grow food down south and send it up north. when it gets cold, you cant grow food outside. trasportation should not cause pollution. they have made eco friendly fuels, but they arent popular yet. maybe they arnt easily available yet. once eco friendly options are as cheap, and as available as toxic things are, then i think people will convert. they also need the education about toxic vrs eco to make the decision, but thats simple to understand = toxic makes you sick, eco doesnt. eco is a better quualtiy, even if they are selling eco things for more expensive, its fair and worth it because it in return wont make you sick.
comapre it to getting a sergery by a licenced professional that will charge $10,000, vrs some stranger you found that doesnt know what hes doing and is going to do it in his living room for $50. chances are the pro will do it right, and the stranger is gona kill you. lol.
people live in landfills waiting for sweatshop jobs, because they cant find a better option. they would rather live a healthy live with there basic needs.
I couldn’t agree with you more, about what you’ve said about food. People need to go back to growing their own food, which creates self-sufficiency. This is especially true in the Third World, where people are so incredibly dependent on the First World that they can’t eat. I explain this a bit in this post: http://sitakali.org/2009/07/16/solutions-part-iii/
Population is a complex issue, since the most resource consumption is done by countries with the lowest population and lowest population growth. For example, the US has only 5% of the world’s population, but consumes 35-30% of its resources. So clearly population isn’t the whole explanation for our growing resource gluttony.