How Capitalism Helps the Third World

reply to post by drew hempel


The idea of sweatshops is a meme marxists pull everytime someone wants to talk about the good sides of Capitalism. But sweatshops dont fly in western Democracies. If western companies run sweatshops elsewhere, they should be exposed like you are doing it. And they should also be boycotted. But this crap is not what we mean by Capitalism here in the west and its CERTAINLY not what is being advertised in the OP.

double post

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Skyfloating]

Here's a good documentary for you about sweatshops and the "West" -- it's not possible to separate the "West" from other countries -- that's the beauty of "free trade"! haha.

Santa's Workers -- amazing expose on sweatshops.

freedocumentaries.org...

reply to post by Skyfloating

Originally posted by SassyCat
A 3rd world country is poor, because it does not have exports and/or is dependent on imports.

Are you sure? Many are very rich in resources (potential exports) and have no money and others have none and have money.

A good example would be a country with stable economy without a phantom crisis for at least a hundred years. Capitalism is still generally young and not tested enough.

Western Europe.

however, China says the exact same thing for communism which doesn’t mean either party right.

Regardless of what they say Communism so their people starving and once they embraced Capitalism things went upwards.

Also, forcefully spreading “development” and “education” in poor places like Tibet or Africa is not really helping – just opening borders would be enough. In fact, I think not going to foreign countries to assasinate civilians and irradiate the land would be a great start!

Admittedly forcing our ways on others is destructive.

In theory, nothing is free in capitalism, so money control means capitalism control while in socialist non free market environments some markets can't be controlled via money.

Good point

With the exception of the Post by SassyCat there is not a single direct rebuttal of what was actually in the opening post.

[edit on 12-3-2010 by Skyfloating]

Rebuttal of the "Sweatshop" claim

The "Sweatshop" Scam

meant to smear all Third World factories as slave camps in which workers are somehow coerced into unpaid labor. But documented cases of actual slave labor -- most of them in China -- are few. And forced labor is not, in fact, the real target of the "sweatshop" smear. If it were, these activists would be directing their outrage, not at American companies, but at the Communist government of China.

Why all the outrage, then, from the "progressives"? The anti-"sweatshop" campaign is driven, not by concern for Third World workers, but by hatred for American corporations. The activists' real complaint is that Third World factories are run for the purpose of making profits and not as a form of foreign aid. Wages, in their view, should not be set by the free market or by the requirements of investors and business owners. Instead, wages should be a kind of subsidy paid by American corporations as a welfare payment to the Third World.

It says:"give them fish........" not patented MONSANTO MAIZE!

You say "teach a man to fish" when what you actually mean is "lend a man a fish and expect 2 back in return". Typical rhetoric of the capitalist whos answer to everything seems to be to enslave people with debt and then when people point out the utter failure of said capitalism, call them a marxist.

reply to post by quackers


Repeatedly giving him fish without expecting anything in return will eventually weaken him so much that he is unable to care for himself. Thats the well-documented and historically proven enslavement socialist systems create.

test