OK, let's put an end to all this
gschofield at one.net.au
Mon Jun 18 08:42:36 MDT 2001
David I only post this to fully concur with your view on this:
>Neither but the theory that first world workers are in some way benefiting
>from conditions in the third world seems to be suggested almost as
>frequently as 'lazy native' theories and some people on this list apparently
>see them as alternatives. Indeed, it isn't just confined to left email
>lists, it's a common place of the environmental movement (as well as
>various charities) that the problem for the third world is 'excessive'
>consumption by workers, along with the call for a 'voluntary' reduction in
I could name a hundred examples of this logic of "thrift" and moral blame.
It is widespread, indeed the common wisdom, and it is so misdirected, one
might take it one step more and say it is part of the current bourgeois
ideology and expresses the general tendency of capital towards universal
impoverishment as a necessity.
I would like to strike a note again on something that I have said a few
times and not had a response - that is that the products of sweated labour
(the quality products made by sizable international companies) sell at a
price just a little down from the price they would fetch if they were
produced in the country of sale - this maximizes the realised surplus and
hampers domestic competition (often it would be profitable but other
investments would pay far more - I believe that is the accounting method
used to derive domestic prices).
More information about the Marxism