“Asian workers would be aghast at the idea of American consumers boycotting certain toys or clothing in protest. The simplest way to help the poorest Asians would be to buy more from sweatshops, not less….For all the misery they can engender, sweatshops at least offer a precarious escape from the poverty that is the developing world’s greatest problem. Over the past 50 years, countries like India resisted foreign exploitation, while countries that started at a similar economic level — like Taiwan and South Korea — accepted sweatshops as the price of development. Today there can be no doubt about which approach worked better. Taiwan and South Korea are modern countries with low rates of infant mortality and high levels of education; in contrast, every year 3.1 million Indian children die before the age of 5, mostly from diseases of poverty like diarrhea”. –Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl Wudunn, writting in the New York Times, quoted in Harvard economist Greg Mankiw’s blog
“harvard economist” blah, blah, blah …
Anyway, you’re right … people should stop buying useless crap every day, not just May Day.
Not harvard, ‘economist’ is the keyword.
Cognitive dissonance: The momentary twinge of discomfort we feel when we satisfy our acquisitive natures buying goods on the cheap at the expense of exploited workers in maquilas in 3rd world countries around the world. But then we find a sell-out Harvard Economist to tell us that we, Great White Fathers and Mothers that we are, (in all colors red, white and blue)are really doing the poor heathen a favor. So that’s what Harvard economists (and the Chicago Boys as well) are good for - assuaging our brief attacks of cognitive dissonance and allowing as to go back hogging most of the world’s resources.
So HP, have you read Eduardo Galeano’s book, Las venas abiertas de Latino America?
On another subject. I get that your views are informed by your early life in Compton. Obviously, my childhood in Modesto was very different. I just posted a mini-bio on one of the people who informed my life. Check it out.
Bloguero round ups are really fun. We should do that more often. I will gladly be the erstwhile Mama Grande.
Will definitely check it out later today, but for the next few hours I have to study for a 9am test(yikes!).
As far as sweatshops go, it is not just harvard economists, or even just conservative economists like the Chicago Boys, it is all economists, whether liberal or conservative that support sweatshops. For example, I am sure you are familiar with Paul Krugman right? He is arguably one of the most liberal economists, certainly the most well known and respected. He has his own commentary on the New York Times. Anyway, he too supports sweatshops, check out his article on it here.
Or take the liberal Brad Delong, professor of economics at UC Berkeley, who also comes out strongly in defense of sweatshops, here.
So all economists, whether they work at Harvard, Berkeley, or MIT, whether they are liberal or conservative, male or female, whatever, they all believe that sweatshops are good, they are good for the poor workers and the poor country where they are located. And frankly, as my quote above showed, history itself testifies that sweatshops are especially good for the poor.
No, I haven’t read the book you asked, but I am definitely going to put it on my readers list. Thanks again for having me over this weekend, it was really fun and I learned alot. We definitely need to do it again. With you being the Mama Grande, of course.