Fair Trade Chocolate and Cocoa: The Sweet Solution to Abusive Child Labor and Poverty
San Francisco, CA — July 1, 2005 will mark the expiration of the Harkin-Engel Protocol, a voluntary protocol agreed to by the chocolate industry to ensure U.S. chocolate products aren't made using illegal child labor.
Eyewitness reports from the field confirm that the industry has failed to fulfill its promise to monitor and certify by July 2005 that the cocoa it imports is not made by forced child labor.
Thus, Global Exchange, an international human rights group based in San Francisco, and the International Labor Rights Fund, an advocacy organization based in Washington, DC, are calling on the US government to step in and end the use of illegal child labor by the U.S. chocolate industry.
"Americans do not want to eat chocolate that was made with illegal child labor or slave labor. No chocolate can taste good that was made under such conditions. It's time for Congress to take action to mandate industry action. And until then, people should seek out Fair Trade chocolate—that is, chocolate which has been certified by an international monitoring group to meet certain labor, wage, and environmental standards," says Jamie Guzzi of Global Exchange.
Producer poverty comes at the hands of large chocolate corporations, such as M&M/Mars and other members of the Chocolate Manufacturers Association of America, that manipulate the market to keep profits high while producer incomes stay low.
We need to come together in even larger numbers make it clear that we will accept nothing less than Fair Trade from M&M/Mars and the US chocolate industry. We also need to work to make existing Fair Trade chocolate and cocoa products available in our communities through school/youth-club fundraisers, stores, campuses, community groups, faith-based groups, and more. Join us today to make chocolate as sweet for cocoa producers as it is for you. You can get involved wherever you are:
Action opportunities for K-12 students, teachers, and parents; youth-based clubs groups
Action opportunities for universities/colleges; faith-based and community groups; workplaces; unions and more.
M&M/Mars Campaign - Demand corporate accountability from the world's largest retail chocolate manufacturer.
World's Finest Chocolate Campaign - Ask World's Finest to be a real leader in chocolate fundraising by offering Fair Trade!
http://www.globalexchange.org |
Confessions of an H&M Addict
By Rachel Neumann Posted July 1, 2005 How can H&M clothes be so cute — yet so cheap? Afraid of the most probable answer, but too guilty to keep shopping, I decided to take a closer look. |
For those of us without much money but with a love of dressing up, H&M is our mecca.
But anything that looks that good on you and doesn't cost much must be part of some deal with the devil, right?
Especially if the tag says "Made in Cambodia."
I had long suspected H&M was engaged in unfair labor practices, but was afraid to find out.
After my last trip to one of New York's H&M stores, the guilt was too much. So I started to do a little research.
I started with the H&M website, which had such a friendly and optimistic tone that I almost booked another flight back to New York.
The company is donating a lot of money to tsunami relief and working on a project to stop the spread of HIV in Cambodia.
Was this sop for a guilty conscience or a sign of a socially responsible business?
After all, Exxon gives money to environmental groups while simultaneously destroying the environment.
|
I pressed on.
Finally, I found the "Code of Conduct" page. Here's what it says:
"H&M does not have any factories of its own.
Instead we buy all our garments and other goods from around 700 suppliers, primarily in Europe and Asia.
Since we do not have direct control over this production we have drawn up guidelines for our suppliers, which together form our Code of Conduct.
This Code of Conduct is partly based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and ILO conventions on working conditions and rights at work.
It is there so that we can be sure that our products are produced under good working conditions."
The code includes requirements concerning the working environment, a ban on child labour (that's "labor" to us Americans), fire safety, working hours, wages, and freedom of association.
Apparently, H&M has regular inspections of the factories it works with.
And what if they find violations of, say, child-labor laws, for example?
The website assures me that they always act in the "best interests of the child."
They don't define who decides the best interests of the child, but still, H&M goes on with a reasonably well-thought out explanation, that is in line with the policy encouraged by Child Workers in Asia and other activist and advocacy support groups:
"On each individual occasion our ultimate aim is to help the child to a better future.
Our policy in respect of child labour must not result in children being kicked out of factories without any follow-up, with the risk that he or she will instead end up in heavier and more dangerous work or — in the worst case — in prostitution."
|
They go on to say if they find two incidents of child labor in the same factory, they cease their involvement with that factory (which leaves the children in that factory out of luck, I suppose.)
Next, I downloaded H&M's just released Corporate Social Responsibilty Report.
The 2002 report has a cover sheet of a bunch of happy and well-dressed children, but by the 2004 report, these children have been replaced by a photograph of a young Asian woman with a grim expression and a blue apron.
This seems emblematic of the company's new approach, which is a change from primarily monitoring factories to make sure they're following the rules to addressing the "root cause" of labor problems.
I'm thrilled.
My favorite clothing store is apparently as radical and interested in fomenting revolution as I am.
According to Corporate Social Responsibility manager Ingrid Schullstrom, H&M's "core values" include not just getting women, men, and children into cute figure-flattering outfits, but also taking responsibility for the local communities the company works in. And this seems to be working out financially for them as well.
H&M is planning to open 85 to 90 stores in the coming year.
All this was promising, but not quite convincing.
Of course H&M reps were going to say they were doing good works.
To find out more, I visited the folks at Students Against Sweatshops.
They didn't have anything listed against H&M, so I checked out Sweatshop Watch.
Nothing listed.
So far, so good.
|
But just when I was contemplating a new pair of aviator sunglasses, I discovered that UNITE HERE, the Union of Needletrades, Textiles and Industrial, Hotel and Restaurant Employees (basically, everyone connected to clothing and food), had organized a boycott campaign of H&M back in 2003.
The campaign alleged that H&M wouldn't allow U.S. workers to unionize, and there were concerns about how they treated their workers in Indonesia.
The boycott didn't gain as much grassroots support as many of their other campaigns, but the dispute between UNITE and H&M went all the way to the National Labor Review Board in November of 2004.
At that point, it seemed to die away.
Not able to find anything recent about the boycott, I called UNITE's Press Secretary, Amanda Cooper.
Ms. Cooper said that UNITE had worked out an agreement with H&M to represent its New Jersey Distribution Center workers.
"Oh," I said, "Does that mean that all the labor issues are resolved?
Is it okay to shop there?"
Ms. Cooper said there were some "complications" and she had to check.
She'd get right back to me.
When she came back on the line, she told me, "Yes.
We're still talking to them about some issues with their retail workers and garment workers, but basically it's okay to shop there."
While it was not the warmest endorsement I've ever heard, it was enough to ease my guilt.
|
Now I just have to wait for the West-Coast store to open.
I've always been a strong critic of consumer activism that focuses solely on where you shop and where you boycott.
An even cursory analysis of sweatshop conditions leads to the conclusion that transforming the World Trade Organization, and global trade agreements, so that people come before profit, would do a lot more for factory workers than just not shopping at your favorite cheap clothing store.
But in the meantime, I'd love it if one of the sweatshop watch places would post a list of stores the way health and environmental groups post lists of seafood, with each one color-coded.
Red would mean "don't shop there or you'll burn in hell."
Yellow (like H&M) meaning "okay for occasional splurges but nothing to be proud of" and green for "go ahead, these are the clothiers of the revolution."
Any takers?
Rachel Neumann is Rights & Liberties editor at AlterNet.
Comments
Solve the equation for me
"They go on to say if they find two incidents of child labor in the same factory, they cease their involvement with that factory (which leaves the children in that factory out of luck, I suppose.)"
|
Yes, it does. Which way do you want it? Child labor or unemployed children?
Cinderella Children
In 2004 I was accepted into the Warchild Just Act! Youth Conference here in Canada. As part of my acceptance I had to complete an Action Plan that would further better our world, or at least raise awareness about it.
I have been an advocate of children's rights for several years now and am extremely happy to see that AlterNet is taking up the call in raising awareness about child labour.
My Action Plan consisted of researching where each store in my local mall made its clothing.
And loe and behold it isn't much of a surprise to see where they are produced.
Places I had never heard of before (Old Navy shirts are made in the Sultanate of Oman?) were making clothing for North Americans!
This further enhanced my inquiries and pursuaded me to check out several websites for and against certain stores (Gap for instance).
If anyone is interested in taking action against child labour and unsafe working cnditions (for all people not just children) I urge you to check out some of the following websites where students (such as myself) have forced their school boards into purchasing safe school uniforms, have protested creatively against Gap (we are called Gaptivists), and are selling sweat free clothing.
I further suggest that people read between the lines and honestly understand what companies are saying in their Codes of Conduct. Just because a tag says that an article of clothing is Made in Canada... that could mean one button is sewed on here and the rest made by a 6 year old in China.
Please shop responsibly.
http://adbusters.org/metas/corpo/blackspotsneaker/
http://adbusters.org/metas/corpo/blackspotsneaker/
http://www.nosweatapparel.com/index.html
http://www.nosweatapparel.com/index.html
© 2005 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. |
Funding Sweatshops Globally |
by Stephen Lendman October 16th, 2009 In July 2008, SweatFree Communities (SFC) released a report titled, "Subsidizing Sweatshops: How Our Tax Dollars Fund the Race to the Bottom, and What Cities and States Can Do" in which it studied 12 factories in nine countries that produce employee uniforms for nine major companies. Widespread human and labor rights violations were revealed, including child labor: Illegal below-poverty wages. Few or no benefits. Forced or unpaid overtime. Hazardous working conditions. Verbal, physical, and sexual abuses. Forced pregnancy testing to be hired and while employed. Excessive long working hours causing physical ailments, stress, and harm. Denial of free expression, association, and collective bargaining rights. Elaborate schemes to commit fraud and deceive corporate auditors. In April 2009, Subsidizing Sweatshops II followed to provide more evidence of a global problem. It tracked developments in four factories from the first report and four new ones in five countries on three continents producing uniforms for nine major firms in China, Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, and America. |
Two cases relied on investigations by independent factory monitors.
Three others used personal worker interviews conducted by "credible local unions and non-governmental organizations with expertise in labor rights."
Three more are based on SFC-conducted interviews.
In all cases, the global economic crisis materially increased worker hardships leaving them more vulnerable, in jeopardy, and unable to secure their rights.
Most often, the following violations were found:
|
The report's findings "are corroborated by scores of academic research and industry investigations."
Human and labor rights violations are the norm, not the exception.
Monitoring alone won't change them, but perhaps public disclosure can help.
The Honduran Alamode Factory
Employing about 500 workers, it makes public employee uniforms and other apparel for Lion Apparel, Cintas Corporation, and Fechheimer Brothers Company.
In 2008, the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) reported some of the worst working conditions in the region, but months later corrective measures had been taken, thanks to exposing the situation to public scrutiny.
Alamode agreed to pay minimum wages, provide back pay, enroll all workers in the Honduran social security system to give them access to health care, paid injury leave and other benefits, and establish an injury log as required.
However, other issues remained unresolved, including:
"Found that workers had been psychologically and verbally harassed, dismissed without warning, and forced to sign resignation letters for attempting to form an independent union at the factory and that at least some workers dismissed for union activities have been blacklisted.... the official reason given for workers dismissed.... was 'lack of work.' "
Two months after voting to affiliate with the Garment Workers Union, employees were told the plant shut down for lack of work.
Yet three buyers, Gap, Warnaco, and American Eagle, placed orders with the factory in support of their right to organize.
|
In July 2008, the Tehuacan Valley Human and Labor Rights Commission filed a complaint with WRC alleging that another Navarra Group factory, Confecciones Mazara, discriminated in its hiring practices.
WRC investigated and found "overwhelming evidence that Confecciones Mazara engaged in unlawful discrimination against union supporters in hiring decisions, otherwise known as 'blacklisting.' "
Twenty former Vaqueros Navarra workers applying for jobs were rejected. Another initially hired was fired on her first day after her former union organizing activities were discovered. In response to WRC complaints, the company refused to comply and continues its blacklisting practices.
The Dominican Republic's Suprema Manufacturing, Wholly Owned by Propper International (PI)
It operates three plants and employs about 1,000 workers making uniforms and other apparel items.
PI is one of the largest makers of US military clothing.
In 2008, Suprema Manufacturing's employees described low wages, high production quotas, unhealthy work conditions, and extreme hardships, all unaddressed by the company.
At the same time, PI distributed a threatening notice to its Puerto Rico workforce accusing the union and workforce of defamation.
The same notice said that SweatFree Communities' publications expressed "a defamatory tone toward Propper (alleging) that the Department of Defense is subsidizing companies with terrible work conditions, and safety and human rights violations."
The notice concluded saying:
"SAY NO TO THE UNION. DON'T SIGN ANOTHER CARD."
In March 2009, Federation of Workers of Free Trade Zones (FEDOTRAZONAS) workers and volunteers and their counterparts at the National Federation of Free Trade Zone Workers (FENOTRAZONAS) conducted over two dozen interviews on behalf of SweatFree Communities (SFC).
They revealed extreme poverty, exhaustion, intense pressure to meet production quotas, an unhealthy work environment, and intimidation-instilled fear against openly supporting union organizing.
Even though Suprema has a certified union, only a handful of workers belong.
As a result, it's weak, unable to represent workers effectively or organize to recruit more.
|
Workers said to get by, they need other jobs and loans (at 10% weekly interest) to pay unexpected medical and other expenses.
Their work load is so exhausting, it makes "my whole body hurt," according to one employee.
"When I leave work, I am tired and exhausted.... All I want to do is lie down, but I have my obligations."
Another machine operator said:
"The work is hard and the production quota is killing us (and earning minimum pay) isn't enough for anything, for what's needed at home."
Other workers complained of health-related issues related to poor air quality, extreme heat, and fabric dust.
According to workers interviewed, they can't act individually or collectively to address issues as important as these or any others.
According to one:
"In the event that we complain, normally they don't listen to us but you have to suffer the consequences.
"One time I complained about the high temperatures in the factory and said it is not good for our health.
"And the manager said to me, 'If you are not comfortable you can leave."
Another worker said:
"We discuss problems at work amongst the other workers, but not with management because we are afraid.... If you complain too much, they fire you.
"So we don't complain because we need employment...."
They also fear recrimination over union organizing or joining one.
Workers today live in fear, endure harsh conditions, and put up with whatever they're ordered to do.
New Bedford, Massachusetts-based Eagle Industries
|
In 2000, 300 union members were fired. After reviewing the case, the Dominican Labor Department ordered 30 leaders reinstated with back pay.
When they returned, management ordered workers not to speak to them or be fired.Eagle
supplies tactical gear to the Pentagon and state governments.
In November 2007, it acquired a New Bedford, Massachusetts facility.
This facility had made headlines in March 2007 when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents raided the factory, discovered sweatshop conditions, and arrested hundreds of alleged undocumented workers.
In its 2008 report, SweatFree Communities (SFC) highlighted Eagle's failure to address abusive sweatshop conditions as well as its hostility to an ongoing union organizing campaign at the time.
In February 2009, SFC conducted in-depth interviews with eight union supporters and learned the following:
|
A division of Armor Holdings, a wholly-owned subsidiary of BAE Systems, Inc., Safariland's 700 employees produce bulletproof vests and accessories, belts and personal accessories, and grenade and pistol holsters.
Workers told researchers that management told them in response to questioning to say everything is fine and not complain.
Reality, however, concealed lives of extreme poverty, living at home with:
"No water, no electricity, and no terrace.
"One room made of garage doors and cardboard.
"The electricity we have is stolen.
"We buy water because there is no running water.
"There is no floor.
"The roof is made of laminate and cardboard."
Workers expressed little hope for future change, even less now in economic crisis hitting Tijuana like most everywhere.
In recent months, thousands lost jobs, and when openings exist, long lines queue up to apply.
Women must take pregnancy tests, a violation of Article 3 of Mexico's labor law requiring equal treatment of both genders.
Article 26 requires worker contracts with wage guarantees, their amount, how they're paid, working hours, breaks, vacations, and other benefits.
Yet Safariland offers only temporary ones, then chooses whether or not to renew them, a violation of Article 37.
Pressure and harassment are constant to meet quotas, arrive on time, and respect supervisors.
|
Failure is punished by suspensions without pay for one to three days.
However, Mexican Labor Law is clear, yet Safariland disobeys it.
The Constitution's Article 123 establishes an eight hour work day, including breaks.
So does the Labor Law's Article 61 and under its Article 67, double pay is required for overtime.
In addition, Article 110 prohibits pay deductions for any reason, but Safariland gets around it by suspending workers.
Articles 177 and 178 let 14 - 16 year old minors work for up to six hours daily, including a one-hour rest after three hours, if they pass a medical examination.
Workers said children worked the same hours as adults.
They also reported dangerous and unhealthy conditions, including accidents with sewing and riveting machines and material cutters, resulting in wounds and lost fingers.
In addition, hazardous substances are used, including thinners, solvents, and Resistol 5,000 glue, the notorious narcotic used by Latin American street children.
Other complaints included supervisors' indifference to worker concerns, and according to one account:
"They do not listen to us, and if we complain they treat us like troublemakers."
Anyone caught supporting a union "would be fire(d) or at least consider(ed) troublemakers," said another.
"They would put us on the blacklist," a believed widespread practice in Tijuana.
The Dickies de Honduras Factory
|
Located in Choloma, its 1,000 workers produce apparel under oppressive conditions.
Wages are sub-poverty, and at best cover half a family of four's basic necessities.
Work days are long, 11 - 12 hour days, four days a week, and constant pressure to produce.
According to one worker, illness is no excuse for missing work.
Union organizing is forbidden, and those caught or suspected are fired.
One union leader explained how organizers are treated.
In 1998, Dickies fired 80 supporters. In 2003, alleged leaders were fired, then in 2005, 280 workers got legal recognition to form a union.
A month later, a Mexican Ministry of Labor representative and three union officials attempted to deliver official documents to the company.
They were denied entry.
The officials and others were fired, and Dickies stonewalled government summonses to answer for the action.
Other firings followed, and the company refused to recognize a union, bargain collectively with it, or address employee grievances.
Workers nonetheless persisted until the current economic crisis became challenging.
Claiming lack of orders and a need to cut costs, worker dismissals began in December 2008.
By March 2009, 58 were gone, in all cases for supporting a union, in violation of Honduran Labor Law's Article 96 that prohibits employers from "firing or persecuting their workers in any way because of their union affiliation."
China's Genford Shoes
Located in Guangdong Province, its 10,000 employees produce work, exercise, casual, and dress shoes, 80% for Ohio-based Rocky Brands.
According to the company, Genford is independently audited for social compliance, but SFC research found evidence of widespread labor law violations.
Workers are constantly pressured to produce for low pay under poor conditions:
|
Workers get bonuses for meeting quotas that must be maintained hourly, but no one understood how they're calculated.
They also complained that they're hard to reach, and they're constantly pressured to work faster for maximum production.
In addition, fines are levied for arriving a few minutes late, leaving early, skipping work, or causing trouble.
It's also not easy to quit even though Article 37 of China's Labor Law lets workers do it by giving 30 days advance written notice or three days during their probationary periods.
Employers must then fully compensate workers, but they don't.
Frackville, Pennsylvania's City Shirt Company
Its owner, Elbeco Inc., a producer of public employee uniforms, "was the first major uniform company to endorse SweatFree Communities' campaign for worker rights," and it shows in how it treats its employees.
According to one:
"I am pretty much able to cover my needs. Anybody can always use more money, but I do pretty well, I can say."
The average worker makes about $11 an hour, but some get up to $19 because the company is unionized and was able to bargain collectively for decent wages and benefits.
In addition, workers have "a seat at the table with the company.... affording them a sense of ownership and respect."
|
City Shirt's employees are also much older than at other factories studied, a sign of greater stability and a contented workforce staying in place, happy to be there, and for many, hoping to stay for the rest of their working lives.
Yet they worry that their jobs may not last because of factors beyond the plant's control forcing layoffs to cut costs and stay viable.
Apparel manufacturing in America is dying.
In addition, the current environment is taking its toll closing factories across America, and City Shirt has had to cut one-third of its workforce in the past 18 months.
The alternative is the global sweatshop as oppressive or worse than the ones described above.
The company's employees hope to reach retirement age before their operation gets outsourced, but making it won't be easy.
In today's global economy, in good times and bad, worker rights are subordinated to greed and private profit, and future prospects look grim.
Job losses are continuing.
Wages are stagnating at best.
Benefits are eroding, and job security is a thing of the past at a time governments, in alliance with business, are indifferent to protecting them.
The result, more and more, is that workers are on their own to endure against very long odds.
It's all the more important for harder struggle because it's the only way they have a chance.
Anti-Sweatshop Legislation in Congress
On January 23, 2007, S. 367: The Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act was introduced in the Senate:
"To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to prohibit the import, export, and sale of goods made with sweatshop labor, and for other purposes."
It was referred to committee but never passed.
On April 23, 2007, HR 1992: The Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act was introduced in the House for the same purpose.
It, too, was referred to committee but never passed.
Both bills were introduced in a previous congressional session and failed.
They may be re-introduced later in 2009.
Sweatshop labor takes different forms, some far worse than others.
On February 14, 2007, Charles Kernaghan, Executive Director of the National Labor Committee in Support of Human and Worker Right, testified about the worst kind at a Senate committee hearing on Overseas Sweatshop Abuses, Their Impact on US Workers, and the Need for Anti-Sweatshop Legislation.
Citing the December 2001 US - Jordan Free Trade Agreement, he gave examples of human trafficking and involuntary servitude abuses that followed:
|
"Roam the world to find the cheapest and most vulnerable workers.... mostly young women in Central America, Mexico, Bangladesh, China, and other poor nations, many working 12 to 14-hour days for pennies an hour."
Corporate unaccountability is responsible for this moral crisis of our time - a dehumanized, expendable workforce ruthlessly exploited for profit.
NLC believes worker rights are as inalienable as human rights and civil liberties and says:
"Now is the time to secure them for (everyone) on the planet."
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
He lives in Chicago and can be reached at sjlendman.blogspot.com
Also listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues.
All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://republicbroadcasting.org/
Global%20Research/
index.php?cmd=archives.year&ProgramID=33&year=9 |
John Pilger: G8 Will Not Ease Third World Poverty
Thursday, 7 July 2005 Green Left Weekly — Australia Vicious, discredited economic programs
The illusion of an anti-establishment crusade led by pop stars — a cultivated, controlling image of rebellion — serves to dilute a great political movement of anger.
In summit after summit, not one significant promise of the G8 has been kept, and the “victory for millions” is no different.
It is a fraud — actually a setback to reducing poverty in Africa.
Entirely conditional on vicious, discredited economic programs imposed by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the “package” will ensure that the "chosen" countries slip deeper into poverty.
Is it any surprise that this is backed by Blair and Brown, and US President George Bush (even the White House calls it a “milestone”)?
For them, it is a useful facade, held up by the famous and the naive and the inane.
Having effused about Blair, Geldof describes Bush as “passionate and sincere” about ending poverty. |
Totalitarian corporations and their control
Bono has called Blair and Brown “the John and Paul of the global development stage”.
Behind this front, rapacious power can “reorder” the lives of millions in favour of totalitarian corporations and their control of the world's resources.
There is no conspiracy — the goal is no secret.
Brown spells it out in speech after speech, which liberal journalists choose to ignore, preferring the Treasury spun version.
The G8 communique announcing the “victory for millions” is unequivocal.
Under the section headline “G8 proposals for HIPC debt cancellation”, it says that debt relief will be granted to poor countries only if they are shown to be “adjusting their gross assistance flows by the amount given”.
In other words, their aid will be reduced by the same amount as the debt relief.
So they gain nothing.
Paragraph two states that “it is essential” that poor countries “boost private sector development” and ensure “the elimination of impediments to private investment, both domestic and foreign”.
The “$55bn” claimed by the Observer comes down, at most, to £1 billion spread over 18 countries. |
Six days' worth of debt payments
This will almost certainly be halved — providing less than six days' worth of debt payments — because Blair and Brown want the IMF to pay its share of the “relief” by revaluing its vast stock of gold, and passionate and sincere Bush has said “No”.
The first unmentionable is that the gold was plundered originally from Africa.
The second unmentionable is that debt payments are due to rise sharply from next year, more than doubling by 2015.
This will mean not “victory for millions”, but death for millions.
At present, for every US$1 of “aid” to Africa, $3 are taken out by Western banks, institutions and governments, and that does not include the repatriated profit of transnational corporations.
Thirty-two corporations, all of them based in G8 countries, dominate the exploitation of the Democratic Republic of Congo
Take the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Thirty-two corporations, all of them based in G8 countries, dominate the exploitation of this deeply impoverished, minerals-rich country where millions have died in the “cause” of 200 years of imperialism.
In Ivory Coast, three G8 companies control 95% of the processing and export of cocoa, the main resource.
The profits of Unilever, a British company long in Africa, are a third larger than Mozambique's GDP.
One US company, Monsanto — of genetic engineering notoriety — controls 52% of South Africa's maize seed, that country's staple food.
Blair could not give two flying faeces for the people of Africa. |
Forcing privatisation of water for British investors
Ian Taylor at the University of St Andrews used the Freedom of Information Act to learn that while Blair was declaiming his desire to “make poverty history”, he was secretly cutting the government's Africa desk officers and staff.
At the same time, his “Department for International Development” was forcing, by the back door, privatisation of water supply in Ghana for the benefit of British investors.
This ministry lives by the dictates of its “Business Partnership Unit”, which is devoted to finding “ways in which DfID can improve the enabling environment for productive investment overseas and ... contribute to the operation of the overseas financial sector”.
Poverty reduction?
Of course not.
Instead, the world is subjected to a charade promoting the modern imperial ideology known as neoliberalism, yet it is almost never reported that way and the connections are seldom made.
In the issue of the Observer announcing “victory for millions” was a secondary news item that British arms sales to Africa had reached £1 billion a year. |
More on interest of debt than entire health budget
One British arms client is Malawi, which pays out more on the interest on its debt than its entire health budget, despite the fact that 15% of its population has HIV.
Brown likes to use Malawi as an example of why “we should make poverty history”, yet Malawi will not receive a penny of the “victory for millions” relief.
The charade is a gift for Blair, who will try anything to persuade the public to “move on” from the third unmentionable — his part in the greatest political scandal of the modern era, his crime in Iraq.
Although essentially an opportunist, as his lying demonstrates, he presents himself as a Kiplingesque imperialist.
His “vision for Africa” is as patronising and exploitative as a stage full of white pop stars (with black tokens now added).
His Messianic references to “shaking the kaleidoscope” of societies about which he understands little and watching the pieces fall have translated into seven violent interventions abroad, more than any British prime minister in half a century.
Geldof, an Irishman at his court, duly knighted, says nothing about this.
Look to Venezuela
The protesters going to the G8 summit at Gleneagles ought not to allow themselves to be distracted by these games.
If inspiration is needed, along with evidence that direct action can work, they should look to Latin America's mighty popular movements against total locura capitalista (total capitalist folly).
They should look to Bolivia, the poorest country in Latin America, where an indigenous movement has Blair's and Bush's corporate friends on the run, and Venezuela, the only country in the world where oil revenue has been diverted for the benefit of the majority, and Uruguay and Argentina, Ecuador and Peru, and Brazil's great landless people's movement.
Across the continent, ordinary people are standing up to the old Washington-sponsored order.
“Que se vayan todos!" (Out with them all!) say the crowds in the streets.
Much of the propaganda that passes for news in our own society is given to immobilising and pacifying people and diverting them from the idea that they can confront power.
The current babble about Europe, of which no reporter makes sense, is part of this, yet the French and Dutch “No” votes are part of the same movement as in Latin America, returning democracy to its true home: that of power accountable to the people, not to the “free market” or the war policies of rampant bullies.
And this is just a beginning.
http://pilger.carlton.com
From Green Left Weekly, July 6, 2005. http://www.greenleft.org.au/ |
|
|
|
Tends to dried fish |
Eating lunch |
All humans have an entrepreneurial spirit, Yunus noted Ideas can start small and go on to change the world |
Hunger, children, animals dying AIDS killing |
Democracy and children Child labor Kyrgyz Peru India Bangladesh Indonesia Morocco Nicaragua Africa Cuba |
|
