|
 "They talk about the failure of socialism but where is the success of capitalism in Africa, Asia and Latin America?" - Fidel Castro “the world is flat,” proclaims the title of thomas friedman’s infamous and best-selling boko. recent decades have seen the normalization of relations with china, the passage of nafta, cafta, trade agreements with south korea, colombia, panama, and more. the latest sweeping agreement, the trans pacific partnership, looms on the horizon, lying in wait for the presidential election to pass and the populist tides to recede. neoliberalism is the ideology of the day among the mainstream on both the right and left, such that it exists in america. barring a surprise trump victory, and likely even then, globalization’s march will continue unabated. a review of clinton’s history quickly reveals a pattern of enforcing free trade dogma and right wing governments in latin america and the global south. in brief, beyond her suppor for free trade agreements as secretary of state, she validated coups of reform governments in honduras and paraguay, pushed for privatization of mexico’s oil industry, had foreign aid to el salvador withheld pending passage of more privatization (a classic go-to move), squashed haitian wage increases, and so on. in america, occupy railed against “the 1%” and bernie saanders decried the transgressions of wall street. the left that makes up their movements argue against the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the wealthy elite. america’s economy is growing, officially, but the working class doesn’t see that growth. and america, for all its riches, cant (or refuses to) even provide its citizens with single payer health care. these people cry out that income inequality has soared to tremendous new highs. and this is all true. but this is only half the story. the american economy doesn’t end at our nation’s borders, but extends worldwide. trade liberalization and privatization are the policies our ruling classes have insisted on for years, and yet when it comes time for any accounting of the successes and failures of capitalism, especially in comparison with socialism, we tend to only look at america and western europe, the exploiter nations on the top of the capitalist heap, to deem the ideology a success story. to the extent that the world actually is “flat,” we need to account for the rest of the world as well. why is there a holodomor that socialism is guilty for, but no potadomor in capitalism’s death column? or, in more modern terms, as castro puts it, where is the success of capitalism in africa, asia, and latin america? our system needs to take responsibility for these thirld world exploited nations. we need to take responsibility for bangladesh.  Police in Bangladesh using bamboo staves, teargas and water cannon fought with textile workers demanding back pay and an immediate rise in monthly wages on the streets of Dhaka today. Witnesses said at least 30 people, mainly workers producing garments for global brands, were injured. Pictures showed children apparently being beaten. Ten policemen were also hurt. Although there has been violence for several weeks, today saw workers erecting barricades, pelting police with stones and attacking cars. Police described the fighting as the worst yet seen. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jun/30/bangladesh-strikes-children-beaten-police bangladesh is a part of our economy. in the processof wealth extraction, american companies will refuse rto pay any more for garments than they are forced to, in many cases using their influence to resist boosts to bangladeshs wages and safety standards. and wages and safety standards in the bangladesh garment industry are very very bad.  we did this. and it’s time we acknowledge our culpability. it’s time we acknowledge that foreign nations in the global south are part of the capitalist apparatus, integrated into our own economy to the extent we do business with them. and we do a lot of business with bangladesh. bangladesh is the world’s #2 exporter of garments, behind only china. 80% of their annual export earnings come from the garment industry, making up $21.5b out of $27b total. the US alone imports almost $5b worth of garments from bangladesh. if you open up your wardrobe and pull out a few sweaters chances are one of them will read “made in bangladesh.”  http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...&pgtype=article but, as the chart above also shows, the workers make a pittance in this poor nation, even when compared to other impoverished countries. people don’t seem to have any trouble imagining abhorrent conditions in 19th century sweatshops, dickensian nightmares where women and children work long hours for peanuts. but somehow no one seems capable of recognizing that this sort of thing continues today, and we profit from it. the people are brown and far away, but that doesn’t make their exploitation and suffering any less real. and that suffering is immense: in 2013, a factory collapsed, finally bringing conditions in bangladesh into news, much to the chagrin of western importers. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/world/asia/engineer-arrested-in-bangladeshi-building-collapse.html posted:The collapse of Rana Plaza, which housed five garment factories employing more than 3,000 workers, is now considered the deadliest accident in the history of the garment industry, with the death toll so far at 446 and many others still missing.  basic safety standards should be a given worldwide, and certainly in any country we choose to do trade with. even those who would rationalize the extreme wage gapyou’d think would agree with that. but some of the dumber neoliberals out there actually, in the wake of the rana plaza tragedy, sought to defend dangerous working conditions. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/327135819234152448 yglesias backs up his arugment that lower safety standards are acceptable with the fatuous argument that, “while having a safe job is good, money is also good.” yes, he literally said that, and his reasoning didn’t get much deeper in his follow-up article. what goes unsaid in these pieces is that there is nothing inherent to sewing clothes that necessitates workers laboring in deadly conditions. in ihs slavish devotion to neoliberal orthodoxy, yglesias embarrassingly fails to make the observation that nobody should have to risk their life to work a loom. it is only a religious approach to his ideology that allows him to rationalize such callous positions. yglesias argues the garment trade offers the best job opportunity these people have available (what he means: the best we’re willing to offer them), and in time as the country advances conditions will improve. there have in fact been some modest improvements for laborers in bangladesh here and there, but not for the reasons yglesias supposes. in fact, minimum wages have been lifted not by a benevolent invisible hand, but only by force. it takes events like the historic death toll from the factory collapse to exert the pressure necessary to imrpove condtions. it takes violent labor protests and unrest. only in response to upheavals such as these can that greedy invisible hand be pried open enoufgh to snatch a few more dollars per month, while the hand clenches and resists with all its might. the 1994 minimum wage saw no increase until 2006, although with annual inflation near 7%, the buying power of those wages sank by 25%, even as the garment industry exploded in size (yglesias says bangladesh got “a lot richer”). the 2006 minimum wage was $20/month (1660 taka). in 2010, this was increased to $37/month, or 3000 taka. but despite this large increase, workers still were pulling in only one third of a living wage.  even with this massive minimum wage increase, this huge concession, workers still cant even approach paying for basic necessities. and here the eyes of many westerners may glaze over… the wages are low, theyre very low, but isnt that normal in these third world countries? how low are those wages really? well, the lowest in the world:  and these wage increases were only won after workers put their lives at stake to protest conditions. the unrest pictured above, with the policeman raising his club to strike the cowering child, these protests in which workers were beaten and bloodied were the price for an increase to this new frighteningly low wage. and they had no allies among their wealthy overseas buyers.  laborers in bangladesh have seen another significant wage increase since then, from $37 (3000 taka) to $68 (5300 taka). how did they manage this? well, by having over 1000 of their mothers and sisters buried in the rubble of the rana plaza factory collapse, of course. after the april disaster, violent protests and international pressure saw yet another “victory” come to the garment workers of bangladesh.  but these advances have been resisted at every turn, and many of the promised wages still go unpaid. there is the fact that an engineer deemed the rana plaza unsafe the day before the collapse, but that workers were made to continue just the same. there is the fact that this same engineer was then arrested in the aftermath, for the crime of having been right. there is the fact that the ruling elite insist on business continuing as usual, because any interruption threatens the “lucrative” contracts they have with western brands. the bangladeshi finance minister, in the wake of the disaster that killed over 1000, says: “The present difficulties, well, I don’t think it is really serious. It’s an accident,” he said, according to The Associated Press. “And the steps that we have taken in order to make sure that it doesn’t happen, they are quite elaborate and I believe that it will be appreciated by all.” and even in the wake of the disaster, there were the buildings deemed cracked and unsafe that workers were sent back into, the eight-story factory with disintegrating beams, propped up by temporary cast-iron pillars. (“The factory is fine,” said an administrator, Shafiul Azam Chowdhury. "No problem.”) there is the flawed new law crafted in response to the tragedy that the human rights watch says actually makes unionizing harder, and which allows the government to crush striking workers. there is the parliament and media, filled with factory owners and other executives. there is the government committee that monitors production and includes members from the military, the police, and intelligence agencies, because keeping the factories running is treated as a matter of national security. there are the paramilitaries, empowered to crack down on workers. there are the workers blacklisted for participating in protests based on the slightest suspicions. and there is the labor leader, aminu islam, kidnapped and tortured in 2010 before being executed in 2012, his body, knees broken, dumped in a paupers grave.  hunter s thompson wrote about nixon that he “was so crooked that he needed servants to help him screw his pants on every morning. Even his funeral was illegal.” im reminded of that obituary when i read about how the headquarters of the bangladesh’s powerful Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association itself is illegal - constructed without proper approval, resting on land illegally obtained, a judge ruled that it should be destroyed in 2011. it still stands today.  the natural response is to throw up ones hands, to insist that this is how things are in such poor nations, and that we have nothing to do with it, that it's not our fault. but the complicity of our country, our brands and our retailers in this injustice is explicit. bangladesh is actually the platonic ideal, the national sweatshop we seek with our policies, the end goal we desire with the de,mands for privatization and austerity that humanitarian aid and fiscal relief so frequently hinges on. cheap garments by the armful, ready to be stamped with our brands and sold on our shelves for the mots extreme profits imaginable (which then, of course, will undergo a second degree of filtration as the proceeds are channeled to those at the top of these corporations). but there is even more justification than that for saying our complicity for these brutal conditions is explicitit. as it turns out, as rational profit-seeking capitalists, our companies refuse to increase what we pay these crumbling garment producers for their wares, and even more than that, are sometimes the final impediment to improved safety. factories that produce garments for top brands are ripe with unpaid workers, sexual assault, and unsafe conditions.  walmart, in fact, likely has some share of the blood from the factory collapse on their hands. from an article roughly 4 months before the building collapse:  perhaps unsurprisingly, companies like target and walmart are singled out for criticism, altohugh many factory owners fear publicly speaking out, as they risk losing the contracts that keep them in business. in the lengthy excerpt below, factory owners discuss how the last wage increase, the one achieved in the wake of the rana plaza collapse, was not met by a sufficient increase in purchase prices, leaving them struggling to pay the new (still substandard) wages: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bangladesh-garments-idUSBREA3C0N520140413 posted:The task of coping with a 79 percent increase in the minimum monthly wage to $68, imposed last December at the urging of some retail chains, comes as competition intensifies among emerging markets producing garments for stores like Walmart (WMT.N) and Zara (ITX.MC). That is squeezing sales in Bangladesh's main export industry. one simply cannot in good faith claim that capitalism is working. one cannot claim that it lifts poorer countries up. it is predatory by nature, and if our businesses have their way, workers abroad will conitnue to toil in deadly conditions, in total perpetuity. thye will continue to exist on slave wages of $68/month that don’t always get paid while walmarts ceo makes $23m a year, while walmart itself posts annual profits of $15,000,000,000 to keep those shareholders happy. it is not we who should be looking down our noses at the cubans, and their 1950s cars, but they who should be looking down their noses at us, and our 19th century empire, our modern day rubber plantations.
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
how bout nobody do any down-nose looking anyway yglesias is awful, is deliberately avoiding externalities, and would probably have a dismissive hit piece ready to go for anyone who pointed out to him the existence of full cost accounting I like to think of collective human health as a commons. Letting people undercut each other by accepting less remuneration or services for their labor does not do the global economy any good are you sure this wasn't meant to go in D&D
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
*d&d poster voice* Interesting OP. But have you considered that all this is really good because the CIA says communism is bad?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
interesting, op. do you have any suggested actions? what would 'taking responsibility' for bangladesh look like, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Here's my dumb idea: Regulate the foreign operations of corporations headquartered in countries with strong institutions. Hold them to the same standards abroad (wrt. workers' rights, environment, corruption, etc) as they're held to at home, and enforce it through the courts. Additionally use tools like government fund divestiture to punish bad behavior. That's a start. Corporations get a lot of support from their governments abroad (trade law negotiation, diplomatic pressure, investment/subsidies/financial rescue, special ops/military intervention). A responsible government would apply (as in actually enforce) regulation to go with that, and initiate criminal proceedings at home when human rights abuses are suspected.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:interesting, op. do you have any suggested actions? what would 'taking responsibility' for bangladesh look like, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
So the three possible answer are holding western companies accountable for the labor they employ, even if it's externalized, or helping the Bangladeshi themselves fight for better conditions, or full communism. 3 is unlikely, 1 is unlikely to get traction, so that leaves 2, which would need a pretty serious operation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
I only buy poo poo made in America which is ridiculously expensive and I'm sure most of it is just made in prison anyway, but I'm trying. Anyway, what's this have to do with elections.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Anyway, what's this have to do with elections. quote:Molten Salt Reactor is a subforum to discuss politics and (currently) primarily (but not limited to) the upcoming 2016 US Elections. quote:Did you know? You can post threads? Not even related to elections but general political crap?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Yeah, what we can do individually is pretty limited, but I think it helps to have realistic goals to unite around, at least if our individual actions are going to be about demanding things of government/other political organizations. I don't think social democracy is just about achieving gains domestically, but having a system that's able to govern transparently and more in line with the code of ethics that most of us subscribe to (i.e. don't be an rear end in a top hat), and having leverage over the private sector to prevent it from loving things up too much. Here's something: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway#The_Ethical_Council Sure it's weak as poo poo, and the neo-liberal/anti-immigration combo government we've got right now is making it worse, but IMO it's a workable idea that can be scaled up if we can summon the political will. Ctrl-F Wal-Mart on that page, btw 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
i almost forgot about this too https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/695638493855379457
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
hi op, nice thread. As the only fuction of capitalism is to make profit for capitalists, have you considered the nessessity of revolution?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 09:55
|
|
|
Bad dems who support free trade said they see it as a form of international charity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
thank you for posting a good thread
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
First world unions need to help their counterparts in exploited nations. Historically for the US at least, that relationship has been limited to supporting anticommunist groups and snitching on leftists, so US unions were often a cancer on the intl left during the cold war. The Aflcio funds a nonprofit for labor rights now but it's really weak. There are some signs of hope. The Aflcio spoke out against the coup in brazil. Once again weak but better than basically every other political org in America. The CWA during the Verizon strike sent a delegation to a Phillipines call center and got guns pulled on them. It was mostly a publicity stunt against outsourcing, but it's a start. Phone posting or I'd post links
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:First world unions need to help their counterparts in exploited nations. Historically for the US at least, that relationship has been limited to supporting anticommunist groups and snitching on leftists, so US unions were often a cancer on the intl left during the cold war. The Aflcio funds a nonprofit for labor rights now but it's really weak. Unions fighting in less developed countries seems like as big a fight as it was in the early stages of union formation except possibly more so since the amount of financial stakes are even higher. Otoh, because of how entrenched the systems of graft are in those countries it seems like even if unions are formed in those countries, it could be trivial to undermine them and generate similar conditions as to what they were before, but in the hands of union leaders rather than the owner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:First world unions need to help their counterparts in exploited nations. Historically for the US at least, that relationship has been limited to supporting anticommunist groups and snitching on leftists, so US unions were often a cancer on the intl left during the cold war. The Aflcio funds a nonprofit for labor rights now but it's really weak. beyond platitudes what the gently caress are us unions actually going to do, they can't even tread water in their own country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:i almost forgot about this too Matty GBS over here laying down a good ol' hitler had some good ideas for us
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Capitalism is responsible for tens of millions of human rights violations Drug cartels and human traffickers are good capitalists
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
this is a good thread and i thank you for it the problem with effecting change in bangladesh specifically is that walmart and target and everybody else will just move to the next country that offers low wages, which drives home your point that we americans bear responsibility for this. some form of sanctions with global force is necessary. i have no answers. i guess if i really wanted to feel optimistic i could craft an argument for why the current global economy is better than the situation in the 19th century. that's about as close to optimism as i get on this poo poo but on the plus side matt yglesias bought a 3 bedroom condo near dupont circle for $1.2M https://www.washingtonian.com/2013/03/21/luxury-home-sales-what-76-million-buys/ and that was before he took his brave stance in favor of sweatshop collapses - i bet he's got an even better place with even higher quality structural engineering by now
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
bangladesh is uniquely well-suited for shipbreaking and shipbuilding and the shipworkers there could get away with unionizing
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
to clarify what im getting at: shipbreaking can be extremely expensive and bangladesh's geography allows ships to be piloted fairly deep inland and scuttled on the sand, which means that bangladesh has a lot of surface area for shipbreaking. the workers there have a geographic advantage and operations cannot easily be moved to another location.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
isn't shipbreaking incredibly bad for the environment
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:isn't shipbreaking incredibly bad for the environment Yup not to mention being extremely hazardous to workers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:isn't shipbreaking incredibly bad for the environment etalian posted:Yup not to mention being extremely hazardous to workers. i dont want to be a oval office. please dont make the perfect the enemy of the better. being hazardous to workers is an argument for unionization, better wages, and protective gear, which these people deserve.- e: as for the environment, i have no idea and no opinion on the matter. bangladesh already has a big shipbreaking industry, and thats why i brought it up at all. WINNINGHARD has issued a correction as of 02:35 on Jun 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
I personally don't buy the 'well they will just move', the world is finite and you can just follow them wherever they move. The main issue, as mentioned, is that there is no ability for the left in the west to affect change anywhere in the world, even in their own countries, on account of being beset on all sides. Getting serious would probably involve sending experienced organizers to Bangladesh, along with stuff like weapons/guns, but that's a total pipe dream.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:well the purpose of the post was basically to demonstrate with a discrete example exactly how global capitalism functions, hopefgully making the exploitation of the third world a little more "real" to people able to get through my 3000 poorly written words. i cannot suggest anything simple like writing to ones rep in congress or anything like that, and whle id support reforms like elpez writes about above if they were offered, i feel we must recognize that this is a beast that doesnt want to be tamed. theres powerful people who own media or operate in government, because thats how power works, and these people in fact suppor tright wing coups, impose market liberalizations, and so on, with the purpose of advancing the very sort of thing i wrote about above. those benefiting from such exploitation are barely cognizant of it, and those suffering it are powerless to fight it. social democracy, ;ike bernie wants and like exists in scandinavia would be great progress domestically but wouldnt do anything to help those in the third world, and frankly would not be entirely sustainable without the exploitation of those in the third world. in short, i suppose taking responsibility would mean having awareness of the situation, becoming a critic of imperialism, and joining movements that want to replace what we have now with sometihng better should the collapse come beforewe destroy the world through climate change thanks for this good thread is there any proactive thing that an individual living in the u.s. can actually do? i mean talking about these things and evangelizing class awareness or criticizing capitalism is a thing to do but it doesn't seem like it accomplishes much carrying the burden of awareness and being a critic of the system isn't really much of a cure for the existential depression that seems to come from becoming aware of it or whatever. really don't get how people avoid succumbing to nihilism when they start to realize the scale and scope of the beast.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
You could always embrace nihilism and become a wholehearted capitalist
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Best Giraffe posted:You could always embrace nihilism and become a wholehearted capitalist is it better to die rich and hypocritical than poor and pure?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:beyond platitudes what the gently caress are us unions actually going to do, they can't even tread water in their own country. revitalize and help overthrow capitalism  but actually looking at the international dimensions of their fights is a way for US unions to actually try stuff right now. if they've actually taken a risk and escalated to, or been forced into, a strike or boycott then loving with the boss on an international scale should on the table. the thing is, it's really risky legally and outside the country getting shot is a much larger possibility. the key would be finding ways to tie it into existing fights so it doesn't seem like US labor is wasting resources on a lost cause as it is losing at home. i think the CWA tactic was clever, but hopefully just the first example a new strategy. i wish i knew more about the campaign but it seems like this tactic tied an issue their members cared about (outsourcing) to something negatively impacting workers overseas (overwork and lack of compensation). in a fight where it would be easy to stick with nationalism or blaming foreign workers they took an international approach, and apparently worked with the Filipino union potentially building connections there for future fights. i don't know how much this may have contributed to what seems to be their victory over verizon, but i'm hopeful it did something and can be repeated. it's risky, but the labor movement wouldn't exist without taking risks this is just one way to look at a potential way to fight the exploitation in bangladesh and other areas. i'm focusing on it because it's actually something i can sort of comment on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
WINNINGHARD posted:to clarify what im getting at: shipbreaking can be extremely expensive and bangladesh's geography allows ships to be piloted fairly deep inland and scuttled on the sand, which means that bangladesh has a lot of surface area for shipbreaking. the workers there have a geographic advantage and operations cannot easily be moved to another location. Also Bangladesh doesn't really have iron ore of its own. The very first bit of it was found in 2012. They need the scrap metal to build places for the 170 million people of Bangladesh to live. That's more than half the population of America in an area 20 percent smaller than Florida. It's not really reasonable to see a Bangladesh without ship-breaking in the near future, and even the UAW guy who walks around in the video below marveling at the horrors in the video below acknowledges that. What can be done though is to make it safer - protect the workers from asbestos and other dangerous substances in the ships. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhIaEEW63Sc
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:revitalize and help overthrow capitalism "Jarofpiss" any social change begins with class awareness and class consciousness, so don't get dispondant  . The most basic paradigm shift you can work towards in any workplace is from the "the rich worked hard and deserve what they have" to "the rich stole their wealth from the workers - workers create the value and the rich take it and pay us poo poo" - everyone hates bankers XD; the other easy one is anti-imperialism, people seem to get that very quickly - all this without having to mention the dreaded C word
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
I did some cool work with some United Students Against Sweatshops kids after the big one a few years ago. Cool thread thanks
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:is it better to die rich and hypocritical than poor and pure? Dying's all the same to me, but living rich certainly seems like a p good deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
WINNINGHARD posted:to clarify what im getting at: shipbreaking can be extremely expensive and bangladesh's geography allows ships to be piloted fairly deep inland and scuttled on the sand, which means that bangladesh has a lot of surface area for shipbreaking. the workers there have a geographic advantage and operations cannot easily be moved to another location. It'll be even easier when the entire loving country sinks into the sea by 2100! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:is it better to die rich and hypocritical than poor and pure? lack of morality is no guarantee of success under capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
I'm from America and I say kill em all
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
gently caress 'em. No better than talking meat. Millions of hungry dogs and cats in the world, and these assrats walk around loose consuming valuable food and water, creating poo poo with which they clog the drains, and whining about their "rights". Process 'em into pet food, I says. Mankind will see no loss. ... Sorry. The truth sucks, don't it. Darwin will make it so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
etalian posted:Bad dems who support free trade said they see it as a form of international charity. Free trade is good for Dems! It fucks the working and middle class, which means the professional class (which is who the Democrats actually give a poo poo about) gets more bang for their buck out of hick and flyover labor. Plus the areas that benefit from free trade are coastal urban areas, and the areas that get hosed are flyover and rural. It's win, it hurts the right people and makes the right people richer! The "international charity" view point is just a way to call the people who don't get with the program racists and deader ends, free trade rocks, why do you hate brown people! I don't think you understand what the Democratic party actually is or does. But free trade is deliberately about hurting a set group of people, that's the point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
Man "charity" sure is awesome when you're giving away other people's money for your own personal gain.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 23:42
|
|
