Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to reply to my own comment since the reply is brief and general: There's little wrong with Rahman's post in general. There's plenty wrong with the psychological mechanics that led it to quietly bubble to the top. Many people rightly see it as an "authentic" shield or cover for their own apathy. Hurl "slacktivism" my way, I'll call you a Randroid or something (I'm not feeling very inspired). Ultimately via…
No one is saying that this is the best of all possible worlds. Without proposing any solutions that work within the framework of reality, though, all you're doing is basking in your moral superiority.
I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
101–110 of 186 posts
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably. Then what will happen to these workers?
They will throw their sabots into the machine and cry 'liberté, egalité, fraternité!' I don't claim to have any answers, but looking at western history you start to see some similarities.
The future will not be evenly distributed, that's for sure.
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#103I've emailed the author asking how I can pay Meem to go to school. I think I can outbid the sweatshop. I'll let you know how it turns out.
On the one hand, I love the initiative you're taking here and the drive you have. Reading the article, my immediate thought was "that's terrible"--whereas yours was "What can I personally do about this right now?"
On the other hand, I remain unconvinced that directing resources simply to the people and charities that come my way through the media is the best way to distribute these resources. Yes, Meem will greatly benefit from this money. But is it good that Meem gets it simply because she happened to be written up in the paper? What about those who are never written up--and does that simply incentivize people in need to seek publicity rather than promote more sustainable macro-level solutions?
I don't have a real answer here, it's just that actions like these make me feel strongly ambivalent, if you'll forgive my oxymoron.
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#104Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#105Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
which may be why terrorism is a predominately educated middle class affair. But accepting your argument, I cannot give in to nihilism. Take the children out of the factories, put them in school, build libraries, train teachers, and wait twenty years to see a vast difference. If you are a military dictatorship that uses your twenty years to educate the country and drag it by the bootstraps into the global upwards past…
It isn't nihilistic. It's just really important to understand how poverty feels, and how it is akin to a trauma that never ends, otherwise how can we in the West ever actually use what influence we have to change.
(For example I see the biofabrication of meat as a technical solution to the awful statistic that cows in Europe recieve a daily subsidy of two dollars while around 1 billion humans globally live on 1 dollar a day)
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I answer people that say this is: It's not good enough. Yes, you can come up with all the explanation whatsoever you want to how this is a ~local maxima~ of happiness, but the fact is that we live on a much higher one with tons of disposable income and benefit from their work... so it s not a ~global maxima~ (not even close) so we should do better. What can I say? I'm definitely more to the left than most peo…
I'm going to reply to my own comment since the reply is brief and general: There's little wrong with Rahman's post in general. There's plenty wrong with the psychological mechanics that led it to quietly bubble to the top. Many people rightly see it as an "authentic" shield or cover for their own apathy. Hurl "slacktivism" my way, I'll call you a Randroid or something (I'm not feeling very inspired). Ultimately via…
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#108I've emailed the author asking how I can pay Meem to go to school. I think I can outbid the sweatshop. I'll let you know how it turns out.
SPONSORSHIP PARTICULARS:
Your contribution of BDT 1500 (USD 20/GBP 13) per month, per child, will cover all necessary education costs for the sponsored child(ren), i.e., tuition, books, uniforms, stationery, school bags, shoes, monthly health check-ups, and weekly nutritious food.
Link to sponsorship form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1MbOD26uhxoHvcvMVHw4-m1LPMXG...
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this is just your angry knee-jerk reaction so you can feel good about taking the moral high-ground, and you're scrambling to find the negative in every comment. The comment you're replying is a detailed comment that also states that there should be more done to improve working conditions and wages. Your comment is a rant about how we're a bunch of "grown-ass white men" (thanks for assuming things about me) who ba…
slacktivism ... maybe angry slacktivism
If someone who is outraged but doesn't do anything is a 'slacktivist', then what is someone who is both not outraged and not doing anything about it? The implication of 'slacktivist' is that the second person is somehow better--that in order to avoid being a 'slacktivist' you should school yourself into being an always-detached philosopher of suffering, always reasonable, always balanced.
Re: I got hired at a Bangladesh sweatshop. Meet my 9-year-old boss [video]
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is saying that this is the best of all possible worlds. Without proposing any solutions that work within the framework of reality, though, all you're doing is basking in your moral superiority.
A first, rather easy solution would be to pay decently. What? Capitalists can't do this? Because other capitalists will drive them out of business? My my, isn't the system really fucked! Time for some radical architectural changes.
Compare this with communism, anarchism, etc. They assume that humans are basically good. Let's just increase everyone's income! Except that isn't sustainable unless it makes economic sense. Negative externalities and all that. There's always going to be people that want power and money and prestige. If you get rid of money, they'll seek those things by turning Russia into a dictatorship. Why should they care about the people starving in the holodomor famine? It's an externality.
Note, of course, that capitalism only works well if you have strong human rights and the rule of law. If either of those fail, you get corruption and slavery. But strong human rights and the rule of law aren't going to change the fact that some (many) people will still be working for $2 a day, simply because they've got no better option. The world sucks, but idealism alone can't fix it.
I don't think I'm explaining my point very well, so let me just state it plainly: it's easy to complain about our f^@!$d up system, but much harder to find a solution that works any better. Before you advocate radical architectural changes, you better be able to prove that your revolution won't eat it's young.
This doesn't mean that we get to sit back and enjoy our lives without guilt. I think every person in the first world has a moral imperative to help people in developing countries. However, we need to be realistic about what works. One great way to improve lives is to provide education, or employment for people who complete higher education. Technology provides a good opportunity in this regard (not the best opportunity, but it's something that we can do, without excuse). There's no reason why a Rwandan in Kigali can't earn first-world wages for doing software development.