The+Moral+Face+of+Consumerism+and+Capitalism.

Grace Moodie - N8795479 Tutor: Judith Meiklejohn

//*sorry I don't know how to embed it...//
 * Cultural Artefact:** http://www.linktv.org/video/1514


 * CULTURAL ARTEFACT**

As exposed by Charlie Kernaghan (2006), head of the National Labour Committee, there remains substantial outsourcing by multinational corporations throughout different regions of the globe. While it is apparent from his video that Kernaghan, himself, is an anti-sweatshop activist, he unveils the notion to fellow Americans, through such technology, demonstrating various corporations are waging a race to the bottom. Kernaghan adopts a forward and passionate approach in an attempt to hold such multinational corporations accountable for their actions, further unveiling the deceit the companies are committing, in addition to focusing the attention to the working conditions. Thus, it is through the aforementioned advances that the public are encouraged to help prevent in the global outsourcing of individuals - “if enough people stand up and say, enough is enough… if this becomes a social movement; we win” (Kernaghan, 2006).


 * PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE **

Through the increasing globalisation of the business world, in addition to the expansion of international trade, both cultural and economical separation of producers and consumers has accelerated extensively (Rudell, 2006). It is organisations such as The World Bank and International Monetary Fund whom have developed ‘free trade zones’ - perpetuating the notion of globalisation and separation, and encouraging foreign investments via tax incentives and minimal regulatory environment (Arnold & Hartment, 2005). The exportation of labour costs in an attempt to avoid the strict laws in the developed world is currently practiced in the clothing industry, in particular, which has long outsourced their production to countries with minimal labour laws (Radin, T. J., & Calkins, M, 2006). It is such practice that continues to fuel social, ethical and political debates, as a result of demonstrating the inequity between rich and poor societies, in not solely a financial context, but more-so in a different context: health. The World Health Organisation demonstrates this notion, with the conclusion being drawn that socioeconomic position is relative to health status (World Health Organisation, 2013b).


 * LITERATURE REVIEW**

Sweatshops are sources of cheap and ample labour, and can be defined as a reflection of our global economy, with the constant demand being placed by consumers on a plethora of industries for cheaper and improved products. This is reflected in the definition, whereby sweatshops are noted to be "a workplace where workers are subject to extreme exploitation, including the absence of a living wage or benefits, poor working conditions, and arbitrary discipline, such as verbal and physical abuse” (Greene, et al. 2007).

Disputes concerning global labour practices are at the core of contemporary debates regarding globalization. Attention frequently focuses on the unwarranted mistreatment of workers, particularly in developing countries by multinational corporations. Critics charge those multinational corporations with unjust exploitation and seek laws restricting their outsourcing policies to developing nations (Gray 1998). Many economists and sociologists defend that the existence of sweatshops remains an important and inevitable feature of economic development, arguing that adopting of laws seeking to restrict the production of goods in sweatshops will only cause harm to the very individuals they intend to help (Maitland 1997).

Paul Krugman has discussed such aforementioned matter, drawing the conclusion that the fact that these countries do, in fact have work is better than the alternative:

You may say that the wretched of the earth should not be forced to serve as hewers of wood, drawers of water, and sewers of sneakers for the afﬂuent. But what is the alternative? … Should their own governments provide more social justice? Of course – but they won’t, or at least not because we tell them to. And as long as you have no realistic alternative to industrialization based on low wages, to oppose it means that you are willing to deny desperately poor people the best chance they have of progress for the sake of what amounts to an aesthetic standard – that is, the fact that you don’t like the idea of workers being paid a pittance to supply rich Westerners with fashion items (Krugman 1999: 85).

Cheek and Moore (2003) attributed the re-emergence of apparel production sweatshops in an era of technological advances and prosperity to several interrelated market factors. These include the fragmented structure and operations of the apparel industry, economic globalization, the rise of multinationals and retail conglomerates, and the global trend toward private labelling (Meyers, 2006).

It can be said that much of the academic work regarding sweatshops has been presented by non-economists, or has been restricted to documenting the organization and activities of the anti-sweatshop movement. Despite this, however, economist Jeffery Sachs provides a different viewpoint, arguing that the concern is ‘not that there are to many sweatshops but that there are too few’ (Myerson 1997). It is apparent that such perspective has formed as a result of the conclusions that free trade without labour restrictions generates future prosperity. Further, developing countries are provided access to cheaper goods and in turn, opportunities to exploit cost advantages in export markets (Arnold & Hartman, 2005).

Figure 1: Apparel Industry Wages as a Percent of Average National Income.



Using the above figure (Powell & Skarbek, 2006), based on national averages, it can be noted that if working 70 hours per week, the average income for apparel workers exceeds the average income in each relative country. Further, in comparison to the per capita income in such countries, the majority of sweatshops pay more than the average standard of living (Powell & Skarbek 2006). While this may hold true, however, it can also be argued that while just because they earn more, financially, than others in their country, does this then excuse the exploitative behaviours by multinational corporations? Is this wrongful beneficence?

While the data used to assess sweatshops is vital, understanding and evaluating the methodologies researchers used when compiling the evidence is necessary. As noted previously, extensive studies have been undertaken regarding the ‘for and against’ arguments towards sweatshops. However, through evaluating such debates thoroughly, a general prejudice became apparent - with those arguments done by economists being the ‘for’, and those by non-economists, proposing the ‘against’. The bias that economists are likely to have is a limitation to the arguments. Often being quoted for their support of sweatshop labour, the economist argument relies heavily on an exchange perspective – the workers are in fact employed, with a stable job and income. This being said however, with the economist perspective considered, it can still be argued that while the data does hold limitations, these do not undermine the severity of the issue.


 * CULTURAL AND SOCIAL ANALYSIS**

Sweatshops, in particular tend to be a topic of debate. Are they benefiting the poor by providing them jobs, often paying better than the rest of their country? Do the pros outweigh the cons? Specifically, Mayer (2007) argued that sweatshop workers welcome these jobs, as they are better off with them than without.

However the term “wrongful beneficence” or beneficent exploitation has been alluded to while discussing sweatshop labour. Whilst the literature reinforces the notion that sweatshops Meyers (2004) suggests that it is possible for someone to be wrongly exploited even if that person benefits from the exploitation and even if that person prefers the exploitation to all the other options.

Who’s moral responsibility then does it become to improve wages or working conditions in these developing countries? It is certainly not the obligation of the underdeveloped countries to demand higher wages for their workers because the multinational corporations can look elsewhere for workers. Most sweatshops are not owned or operated by multinationals but by local entrepreneurs (Meyers 2004). At what point does this become a question of moral and ethical responsibility?

Further, theorist Marx viewed capitalism as a progressive historical stage that would eventually deteriorate due to internal contradictions and be followed by socialism (McNally, 1972). The view Marx took on was that the dynamic of capital would eventually impoverish the working class thereby create social conditions leading to exploitation of the workforce (Mazzarella, 2004).

The cultural groups most affected by sweatshops are obviously, the workers themselves. However, media attention has previously, and is currently, generating a lot of deliberation around the topic. In particular, college and university students in America have been successful at politicizing the decisions of marketing and sports establishments at major universities by focusing media attention on the production and consumption chain of university merchandise through sit-ins and demonstrations (Keck & Sikkink, 1998). Through powerful use of E-mail, media attention and simply word-of-mouth, the group of students managed to get Nike CEO to agree to only using sweatshops that offered after-hours education to qualified workers and raising minimum age to 18 for new workers (Bellert, 2000).

In order to further bring the justice necessary, public health experts should focus their work on legislative changes aimed at the offenders; multinational corporations. As afore mentioned, the question of moral responsibility comes into play. It should not be up to those running the factories in the developing countries as they too are competing for work with other factories within their country. The onus should be placed on the multinational corporations to seek out factories that offer after school education or minimum age laws. Paying subcontractors in the country to build the necessary equipment will also be required. Completely eliminating sweatshops is not the answer, however helping to improve these conditions could be. After reviewing prior efforts to put a stop to sweatshops, it became apparent that public awareness should be a focus point.


 * 6. ANALYSIS OF THE ARTEFACT AND YOUR OWN LEARNING REFLECTIONS**

Overall, the video by Charlie Kernaghan aims to examine the who, what and why of the current wave of job outsourcing to developing nations globally. The anti-sweatshop activist’s goal if to essentially hold the multinational corporations accountable. The aforementioned has been achieved as a result of providing an inside investigation - visiting localities in poverty stricken villages to enlighten the world on how they truly live. Kernaghan also provides interviews with a number of child workers, further legitimising his argument. This piece of assessment in particular has enlightened my knowledge of sweatshop and just how far capitalism and greed has gone. Globalization and McDonaldization has led society to be a purely profit driven world forgetting about what is morally correct and doing whatever possible to make bottom dollar. The extent to which the business world will go to despite basic human rights in an effort to gain has shocked me.

Personally, although I understand a lot of these topics are personally out of //my// handsthis subject, overall, has reaffirmed my desire to continue with this public health degree and work towards a more equitable future.


 * 7. REFERENCE LIST**

Arnold, D. G., & Hartman, L. P. (2005). Beyond Sweatshops: Positive Deviancy And Global Labour Practices. //Business Ethics: A European Review//, //14//(3), 206-222.

Bullert, B. J. (2000). Progressive Public Relations, Sweatshops, and the Net. //Political Communication//, //17//(4), 403-407. Retrieved April 10, 2013, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10584600050179022

Greene, Z., Henry, S., Nathanson, C., & Block, W. (2007). Negative Impacts Of Minimum Wage And Anti Sweatshop Legislation. //Humanomics//, //23//(2), 83-92.

Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Mayer, R. (2007). Sweatshops, Exploitation, and Moral Responsibility. //Journal of Social Philosophy//, //38//(4), 605-619.

Mazzarella, W. (2004). CULTURE, GLOBALIZATION, MEDIATION. //Annual Review of Anthropology,// 33(4), 345-367. Retrieved from [].

McNally, P. (1972). Marxist Ideology And The Soviet Economy. //Studies in Soviet Thought//, //12//(3), 255-269.

Meyers, C. (2004). Wrongful Beneficence: Exploitation And Third World Sweatshops. //Journal of Social Philosophy//, //35//(3), 319-333.

Peet, R. (1975). Inequality And Poverty: A Marxist-Geographic Theory. //Annals of the Association of American Geographers//, //65//(4), 564-571.

Radin, T. J., & Calkins, M. (2006). The Struggle Against Sweatshops: Moving Toward Responsible Global Business. //Journal of Business Ethics//, //66//(2-3), 261-272.

Stark, B. (2009). Theories of Poverty/The poverty of theory. //Brigham Young University Law Review, 2009//(2), 381-430. Retrieved from []

Pollin, R., Burns, J. & Heintz, J. (2004) Global apparel production and sweatshop labour: can raising retail prices finance living wages? //Cambridge Journal of Economics//, 28, 153- 171.

Powell, B., & Skarbek, D. B. (2006). Sweatshops and Third World Living Standards: Are the Jobs Worth the Sweat?. Journal of Labor Research, //27//(2), 263-274. doi: 10.1007/s12122-006-1006-z

Powell, B. & Zwolinski, M. (2011). The Ethical and Economic Case Against Sweatshop Labor: A Critical Assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 449-472. Doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1058-8

Rudell, F. (2006) Shopping with a social conscience: consumer attitudes toward sweatshop labor. //Clothing & Textiles Research Journal//, **24**, 282–296.

Skarbek, D., Skarbek, E., Skarbek, B., & Skarbek, E. (2012). Sweatshops, Opportunity Costs, and Non-Monetary Compensation: Evidence from El Salvador. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, //71//(3), 539-561. Doi: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.2012.00827.x


 * REFLECTION**

Comment 1

[|Comment 2]