OTTAWA — Human rights lawyers are calling on Ottawa to ban American imports that stem from forced labour linked to automotive firms using prisoner work in Alabama, under the same law meant to block products made through exploitative practices in China.
“Forced or coercive labour can exist anywhere when people lack real choice protection or power,” said Sandra Wisner, director of the International Human Rights Program at the University of Toronto.
“Discussions about forced labour tend to focus on global supply chains in the Global South, so in factories in Southeast Asia or agricultural fields in Latin America. But the use of forced or prison labour in the U.S., including under deeply coercive and abusive conditions, receives far less attention, especially here in Canada.”
I don’t always post about ChinaAmerica, but when I do, it’s when there’s no double standard. :D
The fact that this take of upholding US slavery to the same standard as Chinese slavery is done by a professor as opposed to being a part of the law to begin with tells you that there is a double standard in the law.
The problem is not defending slavery but rather it is “If we do slavery, it is good. When they do slavery, it is bad” nature of the law and stance of users.
If you’re opposed to slavery why do you use an iPhone?
A lot of the current “middle class” is built on slavery. I agree we should abolish it but I do expect the majority are in favour of slavery as soon as removing it reduces access to cheap goods. So to keep the venier of anti-slavery, the stance is to say only big bad China does slavery.
Read my post’s thread and then read what you and others commented here. Where are those that are ‘whatabouting slavery’? Where are the ‘cunts’?
It is very clear that it is you.
We have to reckon with the fact that the “middle class” is based on slavery. American prisons don’t just make cars, they also make jeans. Why is this action happening now with cars in line with Chinese car imports instead of a principled stance?
Whataboutism by itself is only a fallacy if it is used to deny the validity of a claim. There is no claim that since the US does it, therefore slavery is acceptable. The claim “slavery is bad” is valid and not in contention.
What is in contention is the claim of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy can only be shown through whataboutism, that is the definition of hypocrisy. The charge of hypocrisy is of one of not being honest and genuine in one’s stance and the application of a moral stance selectively, which you do. I would also extend this to the majority of the “middle class”.
There’s a useful consequence of understanding that the middle class is based on slavery (in the past, at present, outright slave labour or extreme exploitation of wage labour). It allows us to accept the material fact and be able to discuss it instead of instead of putting it on moral terms which leads to thought termination or censorship. Then we can ask questions like, where is this exploitation more, where is it less. How many people are exploited here or there. Who profits from it. Should we change who we pay for the slave product based on that so we minimize the surplus accumulated by the slave driver. Where is the rate of exploitation increasing and where is it decreasing. Etc.
For example, should I buy the myriad of products made in PRC that have American corporation logo on them? Or should I buy the near-exact version, probably made in the same factory on a different day, sold direct-to-consumer for 1/10th of the price? The slavery involved is the same. The American version adds a huge margin that gets mostly absorbed by the American 1% and therefore the fascists. The factory one does not.