8Lun
Unfortunately, you have allowed yourself to be manipulated by the German media, who think they have to broadcast their imperialism to the world. In short, every country has the right to pursue its own policies and organize its own society. If the children there were not working in the cocoa harvest, they might become child soldiers - this kind of secondary effect is not considered at all. Everything that comes from the public is "Muuuuh third world bad, Germany good". Ultimately, that doesn't help anyone at all. But it is useful to nudge the viewers into thinking that it would actually be quite cool to have a world government and a decent leader who is able to solve all the world's ills from his ivory palace in Berlin.
A few centuries ago, there was also child labor in Europe and our kings, when they thought it was possible and sensible, eliminated this situation on their own. Why don't we trust the states in Africa to do the same? Why do we think that we have to march to Nigeria in white uniforms to explain to the people there how to live the RIGHT way?
A few centuries ago, there was also child labor in Europe and our kings, when they thought it was possible and sensible, eliminated this situation on their own. Why don't we trust the states in Africa to do the same? Why do we think that we have to march to Nigeria in white uniforms to explain to the people there how to live the RIGHT way?
•
11
•
@WarrenG
If Wirecard had listened to the media early enough and not dismissed it as manipulation, many would have been spared a lot.
If Wirecard had listened to the media early enough and not dismissed it as manipulation, many would have been spared a lot.
••
8Lun
@Tenbagger2024 What kind of completely off-topic comparison is that? To be honest, I don't see any connection, especially as it wasn't a genuine media issue to warn against Wirecard. Many people have warned against Wirecard, with the explicit exception of Dirk Müller and Olaf Scholz.
••
@WarrenG wtf? Without Western countries, child and slave labor would probably not even exist. That's why it's our absolute duty to do something about it. At least by not voting for the selfish FDP party!
It's explained quite well using the textile industry as an example in "Konsum - Warum wir kaufen, was wir nicht brauchen" (I can't remember the author). Overall, I'm moderately enthusiastic about the book, but the part about how developing countries are struggling with dumping prices is very interesting, because exploitation is still better than no foreign currency at all. Unbridled capitalism that leads to people being exploited in the most absurd way! There is no such thing as a "social" market economy internationally and we absolutely have to get there!
It's explained quite well using the textile industry as an example in "Konsum - Warum wir kaufen, was wir nicht brauchen" (I can't remember the author). Overall, I'm moderately enthusiastic about the book, but the part about how developing countries are struggling with dumping prices is very interesting, because exploitation is still better than no foreign currency at all. Unbridled capitalism that leads to people being exploited in the most absurd way! There is no such thing as a "social" market economy internationally and we absolutely have to get there!
•
11
•8Lun
@werhatdemwirdgegeben Huh? Neither child labor nor slave labor was invented by Western countries (or the FDP), but has been an integral part of human history for thousands of years. However, it was the Europeans who were the first to campaign against slavery.
You sum up the problem perfectly: "Exploitation is better than no foreign currency at all". How do you want to solve that? For households, it's also "child labor is better than no income at all". You won't get to grips with this by somehow pumping more money into the system. The guy who sews your shoes will still only get $2 whether you put $50 or $5000 on the counter.
And it's not just corporations like Nike that are making money. There are dozens of state actors who also have a hand in it. Even if you somehow go fair trade, it's at most the marketing budget that can be divided among the workers.
You sum up the problem perfectly: "Exploitation is better than no foreign currency at all". How do you want to solve that? For households, it's also "child labor is better than no income at all". You won't get to grips with this by somehow pumping more money into the system. The guy who sews your shoes will still only get $2 whether you put $50 or $5000 on the counter.
And it's not just corporations like Nike that are making money. There are dozens of state actors who also have a hand in it. Even if you somehow go fair trade, it's at most the marketing budget that can be divided among the workers.
••
@WarrenG digger.
There were many things in the past that are simply wrong from today's perspective and morality and are no longer acceptable. That is so not an argument.
30 years ago, marital rape was still allowed. Doesn't mean it's ok today. Neither is slave labor okay. And it would be easy to ensure that it no longer exists.
But unfortunately there are simply far too many ignorant morons who don't give a shit and who then vote for the FDP, for example, who block even the smallest attempt to at least oppose it.
The problem is that the exploited people in the exploited states are the most unprivileged individuals on this planet, who cannot defend themselves at all in the capitalist system, but are simply completely at the mercy of us assholes from Europe. And it is only under this premise that "foreign currency is still better than..." applies.
Please take a look at "Consumption - Why we buy what we don't need" by Carl Tillessen. It explains quite clearly how fucked up the whole thing is.
There were many things in the past that are simply wrong from today's perspective and morality and are no longer acceptable. That is so not an argument.
30 years ago, marital rape was still allowed. Doesn't mean it's ok today. Neither is slave labor okay. And it would be easy to ensure that it no longer exists.
But unfortunately there are simply far too many ignorant morons who don't give a shit and who then vote for the FDP, for example, who block even the smallest attempt to at least oppose it.
The problem is that the exploited people in the exploited states are the most unprivileged individuals on this planet, who cannot defend themselves at all in the capitalist system, but are simply completely at the mercy of us assholes from Europe. And it is only under this premise that "foreign currency is still better than..." applies.
Please take a look at "Consumption - Why we buy what we don't need" by Carl Tillessen. It explains quite clearly how fucked up the whole thing is.
••
8Lun
@werhatdemwirdgegeben Marital rape was not allowed at all, the offense just had a different name 🤣 That's just like saying murder is allowed just because some perpetrators are convicted of manslaughter instead ... that's what happens when you only read the headlines in left-wing newspapers instead of the articles.
Anyway, I believe you when you say that it's really fucked up with "consumption - why we buy what we don't need" and so on. But the thing is, you completely avoided my question of how you want to solve the problem?
Anyway, I believe you when you say that it's really fucked up with "consumption - why we buy what we don't need" and so on. But the thing is, you completely avoided my question of how you want to solve the problem?
••
@WarrenG Uh, yeah, whatever. In any case, it was the woman's duty to give herself to the man. So yes, to let herself be raped, so to speak.
First steps in the right direction: awareness of injustice in the world and supply chain law.
First steps in the right direction: awareness of injustice in the world and supply chain law.
••
8Lun
@werhatdemwirdgegeben Please just stop spouting nonsense about which you have OFFICIALLY not informed yourself. There was no obligation to give yourself to anyone. If you harassed your wife and she didn't want it, it was also a criminal offense back then that could be punished with imprisonment. Only it was not sentenced according to §177 StGB but §240 StGB. It was simply the case that a different paragraph applied to married couples, as the legislator assumed that there was a difference between beating a complete stranger unconscious and dragging her into the bushes and threatening to divorce your wife and putting her under pressure.
Again: The ONLY thing that has changed is the page in the law book that the judge turns to before he quite rightly convicts you of an offense against your wife's self-determination. How you can construct such incredible nonsense from this is beyond me.
Again: The ONLY thing that has changed is the page in the law book that the judge turns to before he quite rightly convicts you of an offense against your wife's self-determination. How you can construct such incredible nonsense from this is beyond me.
••