Garment Factory collapse highlights dark side of Capitalism

Originally posted by FyreByrd

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

So just get rid of Republicans and Libertarians and all your problems will be solved, workers will have wonderful conditions, everyone will have Utopia, shorter hours, longer vacations, bigger pay, happy times....there will never be any accidents, the workers will all care about the job they are doing, everything will be built better because Democrats and liberals are so superior.


You're dreamin buddy

edit on 28-4-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

That is not what I said at all. Do you know the classical definition of 'Liberal'? A liberal believes in a society/system/world were every idea, goal and belief can contribute to social success. What a liberal seeks to avoid is a society that is dominated by any one ideology. A liberal believes that the only lasting and, yes, progressive change has to use many ideas in concert to the public (not private) good.

Again, if you are going to defend Republican and Libertarian behavior, please do so on merits. If you are going demean anothers view do it on a factual basis. Please don't say "Your wrong because I'm right" - it's really a stupid and childish reaction to ideas you don't like.

Yes, I do happen to know what classical liberal means, and today's liberals aren't it! But instead of dealing with the nutty Utopian socialist nanny statism being heaped on us by today's Progressives, you attack Republicans and Libertarians as being the problem.
The burden is on you to prove to me why you think this is all Republicans and Libertarians fault. Perhaps the fact that it is mostly Democrats who promote the Nanny State and gutting of Market Capitalism you assume that all problems stem from those who support Capitalism. But then what of Ted Turner? What of Al Gore? What of Bill Gates? What of Warren Buffett? These are all major Progressives who used Capitalism to make a ton of money yet promote Nanny Statism for the masses.
Don't you see the hypocrisy here?
Obama himself appointed the most Goldman Sachs people to his administration and turned around and promoted Marxism.

I think what you think is a logical conclusion is pure disconnect.

Let's clear something up here though. You still have attached modern liberalism with yesterday's Classical Liberalism. Don't preach to me about it when you are using the collectivist version of it instead of the rugged individualism of the Founding Fathers. Since you yourself appear to not know the real definition of Classical Liberalism, I thought I would provide a Wikipedia definition for everyone's perusal here. And here you are preaching to me about not demeaning others and to back things up with fact and you have already been the example of rudeness with your comment about being childish and assuming what I am going to say in response. This isn't just about ideas I don't like. It is also about what is and what isn't, and your definition of Classical Liberalism is what isn't.

Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology that emerged as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization in the 19th century in Europe and the United States.[1] It shares a number of beliefs with other belief systems belonging to liberalism, advocating civil liberties and political freedom, limited government, rule of law, and belief in free market.[2][3][4] Classical liberalism is built on ideas that had already arisen by the end of the 18th century, such as selected ideas of Adam Smith, John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo, stressing the belief in free market and natural law,[5] utilitarianism,[6] and progress.[7] Classical liberals were more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government[8] and, adopting Thomas Hobbes's theory of government, they believed government had been created by individuals to protect themselves from one another.

en.wikipedia.org...

Unfortunately, Wikipedia is subject to editing by pretty much anyone and I find Thomas Malthus to be more of the Progressive nature because Malthusian concepts embody the Progressive dream of a perfect society in which only the healthy and wealthy have survived weeding out by eugenics and population control. Progressives have embraced both eugenics and population control, and the use of the Nanny State to create the Welfare state of governing people through micro managing every aspect of their lives which is definitely the opposite of the Liberal stance of our Founding Fathers.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
Those bastages are going to burn in hell. I can't believe that people don't stand up and take notice. The erosion of manufacturing in the US has led to so many horrors for the third world.

Recently I watched that Jon Pilger documentary on the abuses of factory workers in Indonesia. So heartbreaking. Why oh why do we, occupiers of this earth, not stand up and revolt.

Apple is a prime example of a "Great American Company" that doesn't hire American workers and doesn't pay American taxes.

They'd rather borrow $100 billion and pay the interest than bring $100 billion in profits into the USA and have it taxed.

There really is something wrong in that countries allow their corporations to do everything offshore, and then allow those same corporations to call themselves "great corporations of xxx country".

reply to post by babybunnies

They'd rather borrow $100 billion and pay the interest than bring $100 billion in profits into the USA and have it taxed.

Ironically, Microsoft uses it's typically monopolistic marketing methods to make billions and Gates has used 5 billion of his own money from Microsoft to pump into Globalist education called Common Core standards. Yes, it is global. Microsoft partnered with UNESCO, the educational arm of the UN to promote global education in the new global governance being created by the Power Elites.

How did he get so much money to pump into global governance? By charging you, the customer, for renewals of very license in MS products.
You are paying for people in Zimbabwe to get brainwashed by the Elites in their indoctrination programs.

How fun is that?

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Yes, I do happen to know what classical liberal means, and today's liberals aren't it! But instead of dealing with the nutty Utopian socialist nanny statism being heaped on us by today's Progressives, you attack Republicans and Libertarians as being the problem.

I did not 'attack' republicans and libertarians, I denounced a commom 'sound bite' that is used by many who self-idenityas repurblican and/or libertarian.

Her is what I actually wrote:

Another prime example of externalizing costs by BIG BUSINESS is the fire and explosion in Texas last week, That situation is also an example of Republican & Libertarian "Government is the Problem" thinking where in they don't believe in governance and so 'starve' the system so it can't work. There was no oversite of the plant, no inspections, nothing because of endless republican tax cuts (for the wealthy - not you and me) where there is no money in the budget to do anything for anyone. WE THE PEOPLE can no longer absorb the business communities COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

Since you are so impressed by wikipedia: I'll share an infographic on classic (per your definition) liberalism:

en.wikipedia.org...oliticalquad_en.svg

Four quadrants/two Axes and the four modern ideologies (this doesn't represent reality very well but it does allow for a starting point in discussions)

The intersection of Liberty and Capitalism - Liberalism (as you have defined it - my definition is older and I'll get there)

The Intersection of Liberty and Socialism - Anarchism

Both of the above fall under the heading of libertarianism as promoting individual freedom as a core value.

Then we have Authority and Capitalism were we get Fascism

And Authority and Socialism which is Marxism

Both of these can be called Conservative and/or Authoritian that stress compliance to authority.

I know this will distrub a number of people. This is what I learned in political theory classes and isn't all inclusive of political/ecomonic ideologies. There are many competing axies and spectrums this one is very common.

The wiki article is a fair introduction: en.wikipedia.org...

You are speaking of neo-liberalism, an economic ideology.

See this chart: www.unc.edu...

I speak of Liberalism as a social theory being one that 'allows' all ideologies to work together.

The definition of Liberalism as I have come to understand is very different from the above.

Here are a couple of more charts.

www.nolanchart.com...

and

www.joeydevilla.com...

and

www.unc.edu...

reply to post by CB328

Garment Factory collapse highlights dark side of Capitalism

Capitalism didn't cause a structure to collapse... just as guns don't jump up and shoot people.

This was indeed a sad tragedy but... when we go looking for cause, we shouldn't stop halfway through the maze when we find something that appeals to our particular political slant.

Poor engineering and construction using shoddy materials, weak concrete and unskilled labor have been a problem a lot longer than the concept of capitalism as been in existence. Even in China the former Soviet Union where capitalism was and is disdained, this kind of thing happens.

It's called 'greed' and long before free enterprise was ever a twinkle in the eyes of an industrialist, this human trait was already well established.

reply to post by FyreByrd


Fascism is NOT right wing just because the National Socialists(Hitler and Mussolini) left corporations to function. After all, Socialism is a midpoint between Capitalism and Communism(where the central government controls all the means of production), so in order for Socialism to be a hybrid, some Capitalist functions are left to exist, from which the Socialist parasite sucks off the energy and production of Capital.

Next, I am not enthralled with Wikipedia, but it is useful. Did I not break down even my own quote from it?

Next, I stand by my position that you confuse Progressivism with Classical Liberalism. Since you are throwing around all these terms and labels, where do you put the current Progressive crop of liberals? They are certainly not Classical Liberals or there would be no need to dredge up the definition of Classical Liberal.

Next, let's clear up that whole Fascism is right wing extremism business with a quote from Antony Sutton.

Probably the most difficult task in this work will be to get across to the reader what is really an elementary observation: that the objective of The Order is neither "left" nor "right." "Left" and "right" are artificial devicces to bring about change, and the extremes of political left and political right are vital elements in a process of controlled change.

The answer to this seeming political puzzle lies in Hegelian logic. Remember that both Marx and Hitler, the extremes of "left" and "right" presented as textbook enemies, evolved out of the same philosophical system: Hegelianism. That brings screams of intellectual anguish from Marxists and Nazis, but is well known to any student of political systems.

In the Hegelian system conflict is essential. Furthermore, for Hegel and systems based on Hegel, the State is absolute. The State requires complete obedience from the individual citizen. An individual does not exist for himself in these so-called organic systems but only to perform a role in the operation of the State...

www.prisonplanet.com...
So, do you understand the difference? Fascism is not a symptom of conservative or Libertarian values, as Sutton explains that both fascism and Communism evolved out of the same philosophy of Statism as control.
Sutton explains that the setup of opposites creates a synthesis. He explains that that synthesis becomes that which is neither left nor right. He says the NWO is the synthesis. Thus we see a blending of two political parties that appears to have little if any difference.
Now true Liberty(as defined by the values of our Founding Fathers as best can be) is opposed by the Statism of both the left and the right. This is why we see the Progressives(read:RINO) of the Republican Party often embracing more "liberal" or "Progressive" ideals as they compromise with Democrats to enslave all of us in the New World Totalitarian Government.
Jonah Goldberg also explains how Fascism has a liberal Progressive component of Statism peculiar to people who push for Communism or Socialism.
If we had complete and total freedom and anarchism, who would be there to defend the rights of the innocent, the unborn? The Liberals of today choose to defend the so-called right of a woman to "control her own body" and thus in defending a woman's right to abort her progeny, they sacrifice the rights of the unborn innocents and justify it with a bunch of arguments which they know is not founded in real science. And in doing this, they sign on to the eugenics programs being used by evildoers to depopulate the planet(which is what Agenda 21 is about).
No, the Nazi eugenics program is all leftist radical Progressivism and historically, it was Progressives who embraced this. This is why I criticized Malthus as a reference to Classical Liberalism, as he was a Progressive preaching the value of eugenics and population control.
Bill Gates is another, more current Progressive pushing de-population. This is why he has spent 5 billion of his own money to promote the very Progressive Common Core Standards worldwide, which attempts to indoctrinate millions of children worldwide about Climate Change theory.
The Club of Rome is involved in the Agenda 21 program and they are definitely Elitist.
Now let's talk about the building collapse.
(continued in next post)

reply to post by FyreByrd


(post continued)

In the building collapse in Bangladesh, we have a fugitive owner of the building fleeing.

(SAVAR, Bangladesh) — The fugitive owner of an illegally-constructed building that collapsed in Bangladesh in a deadly heap last week was captured Sunday at a border crossing with India by members of a commando force.

Mohammed Sohel Rana was arrested near the land border in Benapole in western Bangladesh, just as he was about to flee into India’s West Bengal state, said Jahangir Kabir Nanak, junior minister for local government. Rana was brought back by helicopter to the capital Dhaka where he faced charges of negligence.

world.time.com...

Now, whatever makes you think that the presence of a state-run factory would have prevented this collapse, and why do you think that Republicans and Libertarians who espouse free enterprise Capitalism have any thing to do with the collapse of the building?
It is a classic argument of socialists and communists that problems in labor always revolve around the evils of Capitalism. Apparently you believe that if the labor unions were allowed to exist here, then this building collapse would not have happened.

Sloppy building codes and bad construction are not necessarily a symptom of laissez-faire marketing as the OP Seems to be suggesting, and you seem to think for some reason that Republicans and Libertarians are at fault for defending free enterprise and therefore because they think that over-regulation has caused businesses to go overseas, then necessarily it is Libertarians and Republicans at fault for the collapse due to their thinking process, though I doubt seriously that the building owner is Republican or Libertarian.

Furthermore, if you had ever been to that region of the world, you would not necessarily blame Western Capitalists for the collapse.
Having been to India, myself, I have seen the shacks made of metal and other odd assortment of building materials, or little cubbyholes on the streets of Banaras. You would know that building codes there are not the same. I would love to see you take a bucket-bath in this place, mixing hot water out of one tap and cold water in the other. I would love to see you shower with water which was pumped up from the tank below with a hand pump. I would love to see the culture shock you would experience.

And until you are ready to give tax incentives back to business owners, whining and complaining about the evils of Capitalism are just not going to work.
But what I hear you telling me is that because Republicans and Libertarians don't support the monopolistic mafia-like activities of the labor unions, this must be the basic problem of why that building collapsed. The shoddy workmanship must have emanated(in your mind) from evil Capitalists who don't bother with proper inspections because they fully want to cheat and manipulate everyone.

Such is the "liberal" mindset, as I hear you seeming to project.

The substandard construction methods that are suspected of triggering the deadly collapse of an eight-story building in Bangladesh on Wednesday are a common problem in developing countries, where construction materials can be expensive and building inspections infrequent, experts say.

or maybe it was faulty engineering. Is that the fault of Capitalism?

But in developing countries, less steel is often used than is recommended because of the cost.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

So what I hear you telling me is that if this were a state-built(because privately built means Capitalism) and run facility with union laborers, this thing would not have happened.
You must think that if labor unions were allowed to dictate terms, then more steel would have been used to make the building safer?

Originally posted by redoubt
reply to post by CB328

 

Garment Factory collapse highlights dark side of Capitalism

Capitalism didn't cause a structure to collapse... just as guns don't jump up and shoot people.

Just the cost of doing business - Sh** happens.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

Fascism is NOT right wing just because the National Socialists(Hitler and Mussolini) left corporations to function.

So you say - but the rest of the world disagrees - hmm....

Garment Factory collapse highlights dark side of Capitalism? Whats the bright side living in the richest country on earth and working for minimum wage?

Heard the owner of the factory got captured but haven't heard any more any truth to this?

I just replied to another post about Empaths, etc., the downsides of activism, etc. I saw this yesterday but figured the discourse in this would Probably go the usual, it seems I was right...and while this is one of the Issues I have advocated, worked in for Years, because it IS also a Womans Human Right Issue (feminization of poverty), I'm somewhat aware of the problems, etc. I also and still do, campaign for Ethical Clothing/consumption, FAIR TRADE, environmental responsible consumption, education, etc. anti sweatshop as well as anti slavery and trafficking,

Sigh, to be honest, I stopped trying to Convince Americans YEARS ago, one would have better luck smashing your head into bricks and growing daisies, you can't get PRIVELEGE to grasp unless they have been at the receiving end. Now not all Americans are like this, but I would say, rough guess, about seventy percent. There seems to be far more awareness and giving a damn about others rather than just me, me, and me in UK, Australia, and why that is, I don't know. But there is and there is several amazing groups and individual women IN the TEXTILE industries (INDIE) that work to combat many of the contributions to sweatshop, slave textile labor, etc. so I began to go that route more and more, and for some reason, it seems to work.

I don't consume clothes at malls, stores, except Rarely, and I do mean rarely and that's low, and for things like Underwear for my kids. My entire family is anti sweatshop AND educated on, and yes we know about the undergarment abuses as well, I just haven't gotten into the recycled undergarments yet....(for those who don't know, water waste cotton ag, Child slavery cotton, toxic dyes, etc). Textiles is the second largest world industry and one of the most Abusive exploitative industries in the world, especially in that it by far, Employs Women and Children, the poorest of the poor. One of the problems in combatting however, is in many of these regions, if not for textiles, the choices would be even worse, so,

Demand has Everything to do with driving quotas, cheap labor, for profit margin, Not for the workers but for the corp heads. One of the other serious issues that isn't brought into is the environmental strain too, but that would take up a whole other forum. As for FAIR TRADE and Ethical clothing, lots of problems with that too, mostly, costs, because the Demand simply isn't there...there is no market for it. Those in textiles (small designers, etc) struggle with working to create a more ethical climate but people want TRENDS (that's a huge part of it too) and they want them dirt cheap, practically free. These trends of course change every season...

The Reconstruct and recycle in some areas takes off but that I believe has a lot to do with economy more than conscience. So, why? geo political racism is a large part, the belief of ENTITLEMENT is another, and down right APATHY is the biggest I would say. The rest, is just excuses...I also will go in a limb and say a Huge contributed is blatant sexism too, but, try arguing that one...more head banging would be preferable.

Ive been watching the outcome of the factory and workers demanding changes, etc., my concern of course is like these corps usually do, they'll simpy move base somewhere else. Until the Change in attitudes of Consumer changes, these abuses will only continue to worsen, these corps know it too. Why they feed into the demand, marketing in advertising and media, etc. So as for me and our house, I think the solutions are more Fair trade coops and outlets, that reward corps for ethical business practices and that's what we Need to create a demand for.

As for boycotts, several of the labor organizers who have WORKED in these sweatshops, at the anti sweatshop conferences have said that boycotts don't work, these corps have bases (we call them Labor Camos because that's what they are really or make shift camps) all over developing nations and when there is pressure to stop the abuses, etc the workers will show up in morning and the whole base will be closed, gone and moved to another location. I spoke to a labor garment leader who experienced this in El Salvador. So it's a huge problem, that and the thug gov torturing labor leaders for Daring to want the minimum of human rights we take for granted here. because as you know, if you're non white why don't ya know god almighty Christiandom has Put you in this earth to slave away and waste away for precious "whitey" . The Exceptional Special American,

Yea that IS THE ATTITUDE and I didn't have a problem saying it. Not that it's ONLY American however, that don't give a damn attitude is in parts of Asia (talking fashion/textile industries, etc) and Europe, but it does seem to be more prevalent among the American west...aka capitalism, yes. Or better Chrony capitalism under a fascist imperialist face. It IS flat out geo political racism, though that's not the PC term, but oh we'll, it's TRUE.

But now, that's part of the problem, even IF you change that aspect, you'd find that supremacy from other regions (oh btw, that same supremacy is in parts of Middle East too and I'm not just talking Israel, the slave labor aka textiles goes way back in time and it is a huge complex problem, meaning, you CAN'T just BLAME America, so)...the obvious, is lack of enforceable Labor laws,

And this is what's crazy, the very one's who will rise up and scream against any International labor enforcement Is in fact your Nationalists in these countries so THEY PLAY a HUGE part in oppressing their own workers and people too. So it's Partly the demand of selfish indifferent consumers AND the rabid stubbornness of Nationalists who oppress and extract wealth from their very own, both of course are best of buddies in the whole trade thing. The Workers, poor, women, children and trafficked slaves, are the ones who get screwed over.

It's like with the chocolate (horrendous slavery there), the coops farms that have been able to break free and grow and export without child slavery, have done well, but it's the mega corp and their minions (in these countries) because of greed, corruption, etc, who Sabatoge, etc to monopolize the market, etc., and then the demand, fair trade is not cheap. BUT, the thing is, IF CONSUMERS DEMANDED Ethical goods then the companies would be forced to change policies so the POWER in a huge way DOES fall into the hands of yes, the Consumer. What amazed me, is the disconnect, people can't connect the dots, in that of you are complacent, and don't Care about worker rights, then eventually YOUR rights will be at risk as well, because the cheaper the labor, the more competitive FOR that slave labor, and yea, I find it ironic how many complain now about the INSOURCING of cheap SLAVE labor here, aka our corp prisons. Well, that's what it WILL take, to compete with dire conditions and labor abuses there...and one big area of insourcing, is none other than TEXTILES in your local PRISONS. It will Yes, trickle down, guess, you kind of do get, what you pay for in the end.

hopefully now some folk are no longer viewing their super cheap primarni clothing as quite so cost-free.

and £500 dollars for a belt? did i read that right or do i need another cuppa

i guess i could go back and check but i think i read it right... so i'll go ahead, and will apologise later if i made a boob - so lets think about it... a strip of tanned leather, some stitching and a buckle plus time, design, storage and transport costs. you are not paying for quality boncho, you are having your desire for status massaged. as well as your wish to engage in low-class boasting

reply to post by CB328


I just heard on radio news (KPFK Los Angeles) that the Bangladeshi arrested eight directors of this company for ignoring safetly standards, one as he was attempting to flee the country.

www.rawstory.com...

Has the US arrested anyone in the Texas fertilizer fire? Will they? No the directors of the Texas plant will get big bonuses and better jobs.