Economic Shock

I started reading the Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein this month. I have to say it's a huge improvement in her work. Not that her other books were not good, this just seems more researched and has a solid thesis. The main point being that when a country is hardest hit, the regions' politics turned on its head, a new economic policy is put into place. One that rips out old social programs, privatizes a country's wealth, and basically guts the country's economy creating a chasm between classes. And sometimes a country's political structure is ripped apart just to implement these plans. Klein brilliantly points out that people need to connect the dots. The Dirty War in Argentina was looked at as a horrible human rights atrocity but it was never put into perspective. The repression in South America in countries like Chile and more currently, but to a lesser extent, Bolivia was never fully understood by the rest of the world.

It's even harder to believe that these incidents just spontaneously happened. The University of Chicago, the incredibly conservative Economic department that housed the likes of Milton Friedman, sponsored programs to bring students from left leaning countries to the Chicago School to study their brand of economics. In Chile after the coup many of these students were advisers to Pinochet. This was of course covertly stopping international Marxism.

Which brings us to the subject of torture. During the 1950's the CIA experimented with sensory deprivation, drugs, and torturous activities to see if subjects could be brainwashed. "A clean slate," as Klein put it. On a larger scale this is exactly what has been done in places like Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, and the list goes on. Beat a nation into submission, rape their resources, and make a public spectacle of anyone who resists.


*Interesting fact- the definition of genocide "a group exterminated based on race, religion, or ethnicity" originally included "political" but was ultimately struck down before it was approved by the United Nations.

Occupy Resist Produce

A few years ago I saw the film "The Take," ( thetake.org ) a documentary about workers in Argentina that had turned factories closed by World Bank/IMF fiscal restructuring into cooperatives. The workers illegally occupied the factories, barricading themselves in against police attacks, to earn a living to feed their families. Their motto was "Occupy, Resist, Produce!" Legalities were settled in favor of the workers since the previous owners of the factory fled the country with outstanding amounts of debt. The workers have continued the factories much in the tradition of Mondragon of Spain. (Which is also worth checking out-- http://www.iisd.org/50comm/commdb/desc/d13.htm )

Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis captured the frustration of the people of Buenos Aires as well as their triumphs. While the film was outstanding it left you wanting more! Luckily the good people at Haymarket books have put out Sin Patron, a new book detailing stories of some of the cooperatives. It was put together by Lavaca, which is one of the cooperatives of the region.

http://www.haymarketbooks.org/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=Haymarket&Product_Code=LASPA&Category_Code=LA

Sin Patron is on loan at Worldgoods for those of you who are interested. And for those of you not in the area I highly recommend picking this book up. In today's economy it sometimes feels like the good guys never win but Sin Patron is a story of hope, determination, and victory!

Profiting off Poverty

Product red is a campaign of multinational producers that are each putting out a "red" item in which a portion of the funds will go to fight AIDS in Africa. The Gap has a t-shirt, converse has a shoe, there's a red myspace, a red motorola, American Express, and even Giorgio Armani hosted a night of fashion for the cause.

At best this campaign raises awareness considering the corporate counterparts are getting a much larger chunk of the profit than any AIDS victim in Africa, but much more this whole en devour is a large pat on the back in the form of an amazing pr opportunity.
Unfortunately there is a giant flaw in their plan.

The same cycle of unethical business that dehumanizes labor and has no regard for the environment is not suddenly going to solve the world's problems. The fact that the Gap is clinging to an "ethical" image is laughable. The company subcontracts its labor, a convenient method for the corporation to have no responsibility for how its garments are made. Just recently the Observer discovered child labor producing clothing for Gap Kids.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2200590,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

The Gap's spokespeople said they were deeply embarrassed by the situation and severed ties with this production outlet. But this isn't new. In fact the Gap has continuously been accused of employing sweatshop labor and yet each time they act surprised and hope to quickly cover the situation.

Nike, which owns Converse, also has a long sordid past of using sweatshop labor. So these multinationals want to raise awareness about AIDS, but not about the global economic politic that lands developing regions in these types of situations. Africa is in such a state because of colonialism and the fact that the entire continent was raped and pillaged in the name of profit. But now through the magic of mindless consumerism we can solve these problems? More likely the Gap, Nike, and the rest of them are creating more problems in different corners of the world. Maybe someday the Gap will have a shirt whose proceeds will go towards educating Indian children. And Nike can make a shoe whose proceeds will benefit the women of Mexico's maquiladoras. It's a brilliant plot to perpetuate poverty.

I guess the biggest problem I have with this campaign is that it reinforces our consumerism. Now consumerism is moral. Not only that but I can wear a t-shirt that lets everyone know just how much I care. Shams like this also make people with good intentions suspicious of worthwhile organizations and reinforce feelings of apathy. People can make a difference, but exploiting one economically devastated area to help another is not the answer.