[Ro]

To be quite honest, I'm still relatively young and somewhat uninformed in comparison to many of you (or at least I think I might be) when it comes to this issue.

That said, I tend to agree with Ag's arguments for boycotting a multinational corporation that uses cheap foreign labor to produce their goods.

While it's true that many people in third world countires have no other alternative, I will disagree with the idea that I am hurting those people by boycotting the goods they produce, and the companies that sell them. Here's a few reasons why:

-The notion that EPZs (when I use the term Economic Processing Zone, consider it to mean Free Trade Zone, Industrial Free Zone, or any similar term) have increased employment substantially is false. Sure, the number of total jobs may have increased, but the effect on the national figures of joblessness are not significantly increased, save for a few extreme examples. In other words, yes, jobs are created. But are they the right jobs?

-Many EPZs do not pay workers a living wage. Again, long hours, poor working conditions, no benefits, etc. I understand some of these people may have no other alternative, but that doesn't make it right. What were these people doing before Nike and Adidas showed up? (If the answer is prostitution, selling drugs, illegal activities, etc., then a whole new set of issues arises). What will they do once they organize a union and demand better wages/working conditions, and Nike & Adidas say "see ya later, Indonesia, you want too much. We're taking this factory to El Salvador instead, to an area where we can pay workers less than we do here." This happens all the time, and is fostered by the nature of business- Nike didn't set up shop in China because it wanted to help out the people or the economy there, it moved there for cheap labour. If cheaper labour arises in Africa, guess where Nike is going?

-Why not support Canadian/American/European companies? Sure, you're going to pay a few dollars more for a Sierra Designs winter jacket than a Columbia one, but what if the quality is much improved? If you're supporting a small Canadian business trying to compete with the big boys, instead of Sport Chek goods produced millions of miles away from home?

-Call me whatever you want, but the very fact that the level of human inequality between somebody wearing a $60 Nike hoodie in Calgary and a 15 year old girl in El Salvador who makes 300 of those a day for less than $2 a day, which is not enough to even BREAK EVEN, is very disheartening to me. I don't want to contribute to the capitalistic idea of profiting from other's economic misfortune.

This is a complex issue, and if it is going to be conquered on a global scale, third-world nations and their workers will need to be educated about the economics of the issue, and demand change. I will admit that, perhaps, boycotting goods/companies gives the boycotter a positive emotional feeling, and a sense that they are combatting a moral injustice. It is certainly debatable as to whether or not simply boycotting goods/companies will result in any long-term effects the boycotter desires, and that's why botcotting is only one action one should consider if he wants to truly combat the problem (revoking corporate charters, demanding public access to media, unbranding, activism, etc.).

And I will also say that I wouldn't boycott a company that employs workers in EPZs in Cambodia, if , for example, those workers were paid a good wage, employed under good conditions, offered some sort of benefits, children were not employed, etc. That is the root of the issue if you ask me, and to boycott for other reasons might be inefficient, irresponsible, and misguided. I suppose the more informed one is about what one purchases, the better. That said, I still believe it is perfectly acceptable for somebody to boycott Wal-Mart, Nike, or The Gap because in the past their practices within EPZs have been proven to be unethical, severe, even abusive and slave-like, amongst other reasons. If those companies choose to improve the working conditions in their EPZs, then boycotting those companies for that reason alone is irrational and not the answer.

Whew. Comments welcome.