[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by Blue Lion
Why don't you go ask the leaders of these Asians countries who let their children be used as slaves? Nike did not come in with guns and say "Make shoes using slave labor or we kill you"

No, Nike didn't come in with guns, but they're still profiting from slave labor and no American should be able to do that. Otherwise, we're just saying that freedom is an ideal that applies only to us.

Is freedom a universal ideal or isn't it? If we say it is, then profit from slave labor, whether organized by us or someone else, that makes us hypocrites and makes the Constitution a lie.

I didn't spend my entire life becoming a lawyer just so I could watch the very thing I'm dedicating my life to become a hollow lie. If any of you reading this live in the United States of America, either you believe that freedom is a right that applies to everyone everywhere in the world or you're not really an American, even if you say you are.

And if any of you are European and you don't believe that freedom, self-determination and liberty are universal ideals that apply to everyone equally, then you're a disgrace to Western civilization.

Don't even get me started on the Middle and Far Easterners who still have outdated tribal values like legal rape....

[Mr. Vega]

If us Americans get it, than everyone should.

Once again, I don't give a damn about being an American, only as a member of the human race.

[Blue Lion]

Originally posted by Su-tehp


No, Nike didn't come in with guns, but they're still profiting from slave labor and no American should be able to do that. Otherwise, we're just saying that freedom is an ideal that applies only to us.

Not everyone has your ideals and places a high a value on human life. Is Nike breaking the law?

If any of you reading this live in the United States of America, either you believe that freedom is a right that applies to everyone everywhere in the world or you're not really an American, even if you say you are.

Do I want little kids making shoes? No. Is it my job to free them? No

[Bobboau]

I own Reebok, I therefore am morally clean

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by Blue Lion
Not everyone has your ideals and places a high a value on human life. Is Nike breaking the law?

Profitting from slave labor? Yeah, I'd say that's pretty illegal...

But even if it isn't, Nike runs the risk of getting sued by civil rights lawyers and if Nike loses the case, it could be liable for millions of dollars in damages.

Then there's the fact that people could be (and probably are) organizing a boycott of Nike products, which will also wind up hurting Nike financially in the long run.

I've seen lots of people get really worked up and successfully organize boycotts over less.

Originally posted by Blue Lion
Do I want little kids making shoes? No. Is it my job to free them? No

I know it's not your job to free them. It's not like the US could invade every country to force them to stop providing slave labor to American companies with plants and factories overseas. What is your job is to stop buying products from companies that profit from slave labor. Choose a different brand and buy your stuff from someplace else. Otherwise, if you tell people that you value American ideals, yet refuse to care about people being hurt because you couldn't be bothered to give a damn and buy a different brand of sneakers, then everyone you meet will dismiss you as a hypocrite, a liar and a fool.

If you go that way, it will be a reputation that you will easily deserve, Blue. I'd rather keep a fellow American from going down that road.

[Star Dragon]

Notepad and Word pad only save as .RTF no matter what option I choose, since I don't have WORD (mistaken I thought Wordpad counted as word). It won't let me upload chapter 1. So until futher notice no story for you!

As for 'slave labor' America was built on the backs of others. I don't like it and certainly don't want to see anythig like it in the future BUT you can't deny that it happened and that as Americans (all of us) benefit from that history. That said, what about India (not wanting to pick a fight , but hey that's what opinions are for). I would think that the cigarette industry there (Bidi's) enslave more children (in there own homes chained to the bed) rolling ridiculous amounts of cigarettes per day or else! I think there is a good place to start. Kill the Bidi owners, arrest the parents and free the children (so Sally Struthers can feed them!).

[Loading up the mech, ETA 2 Hours, it's clobberin time!]
 

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by Blue Lion


Not everyone has your ideals and places a high a value on human life. Is Nike breaking the law?

Do I want little kids making shoes? No. Is it my job to free them? No

So you say that if you would have lived 150 years ago, you would help the Souths, fighting against the liberation of the african slaves your people were using.

[Martinus]

This thread is really depressing the hell outta me.

Why has nobody pointed out the logic behind third world people actually wanting large families? Most of them are sustenance farmers. More children = more free labour.
OK so you're going to point out also that there are more mouths to feed so that's a stupid point but consider that a relatively successful sustenance farm can support a considerable amount of people but a poor farm can hardly support one or two. More workers (children) ends up having a better survivablity chance for the family as a whole.

Another point that I find ridiculous is the 'computer control' concept; No one would want to implement it, no one would surrender control to it and logic is not how the human race operates. Deal with it.

I agree with Shrike on the concept of 'small steps'. Everybody's not going to wake up tomorrow and suddenly do everything that they can to help the world as a whole. You've heard the expression 'every penny helps'? It doesn't just apply to money, every small positive step leads to an overall positive result. One of the biggest positives would be breaking down nationalist ideals. I also dislike staunch nationalism, it is its own worst enemy in any case.

When all the people in these stupid third world countries die where are you going to get your Nike's?

[Kazashi]

Originally posted by Blue Lion
You'd think people would realize, if your children are dying, they are dying for a reason, please stop having more than you can handle.

I'm sure that'd be nice and easy to believe if you didn't live in a country where your child died after less than a year of life. Of course you seem to have overlooked the point that children will still die whether the family has one child or five.

Mean what? All I'm saying is only have as many children as you can adequately afford to keep healthy, if that's 1, 2, 100 kids, whatever. But if you cannot afford them, do not have them and then expect me to chip in.

I hope you realise that this scenario also applies to "civilized" countries. Of course, to avoid chipping in for these people, you'd have to stop paying tax.

Yes? Is it my responsibility to? No. Is it my choice? Yes, and I choose not to.


So how is that my responsibilty?


If I want to, not when I'm told to


You just asked and answered your own question, am I damned for all time because I don't help homeless kids in Africa? I don't think so

All theological discussion aside, if you don't feel sorry or guilty about not lifting a finger, then so be it. Here's hoping that you don't find yourself in a similar situation. I'm sure there will be people willing to help, but then again there will be lots of people sitting there watching the 32nd series of The Simpsons, now purchased and produced by a Chinese company

Are you implying we didn't work for it?

Not really, I was more amused at your attitude, as I continue to be. I must admit, it reminds me of the dole bludgers who appeared on radio to state their case that the country owed them a living. A question for your question: who is "we"? Is a political boundary that important that you can refer to people within as "we"? Why is that "we" so different from the "we" as defined by the surface of this planet? Did you personally work to shape and forge your nation? Ok, so that's probably a hypocritical surmisation on my part since I'm a disabled pensioner....

I present another part of that argument - does your question imply that 3rd world countries don't work as hard? Of course! Since they don't have enough water available they must not work as hard to tend their farms! Hmmm, sarcasm tags would be great right about now.

Are you trying to tell me that bringing nations, as they stand, to a level comparable to ours is good for me?

If you're so concerned about money, then it won't be good for you. It seems as though many people can't see past the competition aspect of economics - doesn't matter if it helps the whole because it might take away our customers. I guess that comes with the country you live in though: if the government can bend world trade rules to suit itself then it must be ok for the regular citizens to play by the same rules. If the betterment of your own country means the economic destruction of another, is that fine with you? Must be made easier since you don't have to look at them directly, TV's can be turned off, newspapers thrown out or burned, the internet can be filtered.

Why don't you go ask the leaders of these Asians countries who let their children be used as slaves? Nike did not come in with guns and say "Make shoes using slave labor or we kill you"

Quite often the leaders don't know. Quite often the parents of the children don't know. Nike didn't need guns because they could get away with doing everything quietly. Did Snipes enter the NTF by stepping in guns blazing and demanding to be placed in a ranking position?

Do they actually broadcast the documentaries of sweat shops, interviews with the workers, standover tactics of the companies etc on US television? The workers are given "promises" of good pay and fair treatment before being seperated from their families, only to find out the harsh reality not long after. Many South Korean "entertainment" facilities used to serve US G.I.'s also used the same lines to recruit South-ease Asian women as "waitresses", only to force them into being whores for those troops. In typical fashion, the G.I.'s don't care about how the women are treated because they get the good end of it.

[CP5670]

I have been reading some of the posts here about rights; since when did anyone have any rights whatsoever in that sense? The only rights people have are the ones that they have the power to uphold, and these materialize in the form of national laws. Beyond that, how could anyone say what "rights" people have? (whatever that means anyway) I could say that every human has the "right" to do whatever he pleases if he has the material capability, including deny the rights of others, and who is to say whether or not I am right? And also, how is it that the humans must have rights but, say, ants or even computers do not need rights? In the end, everybody has no rights and all rights.

Another point that I find ridiculous is the 'computer control' concept; No one would want to implement it, no one would surrender control to it and logic is not how the human race operates. Deal with it.

You think it must come about all that willingly?

One of the biggest positives would be breaking down nationalist ideals. I also dislike staunch nationalism, it is its own worst enemy in any case.

The only way to do this is to completely eliminate the system of independent nations and unite everyone under a common government. This will happen at some point anyway, but it could be peaceful (gradual cohesion of nations, e.g. the EU) or violent (one nation conquers the world). Either way, once a united government is in place, it would solve quite a few of these problems. Also, many of these problems can be traced to the corporations of today in some way or another, and if a true communist system is put in place, these will cease to exist.

When all the people in these stupid third world countries die where are you going to get your Nike's?

As I said, automation. I don't doubt that robots will become cheaper than humans in the long run due to their much increased efficiency.

[wEvil]

US television is pretty infamous for its' lack of interest in foreign affairs.

And while we're on the subject of america - it's not your fault, but it is.

Before you say "huh" and stop reading - let me explain this statement.

It is the fault of your leaders, and the people you allow to control you.  Obviously the onus is on them for the apparent behaviour of your country, however the general publics' continued reluctance to have so much as an iota of interest outside their own immediate lives means that by doing nothing you automatically accept a part of the blame.

What must you do to absolve yourselves?  In order:
Get interested in whats going on around you

Get Educated in whats going on around you

Get flexible about your viewpoints - an argument that ends the same place its started is an excersise in futility.

Finally, get other people interested in it.

If everything goes well, then you'll wind up with a large body of people capable of taking a well informed interpretation of events and capable of making intelligent decisions from those events, as opposed to the useless knee-jerk reactions we've seen from the twin towers incidents and hundreds of others that receive less media coverage.  I'm british, but trust me, we have just as many idiots as every other country does.

But really, in terms ot attempting to change anything small steps won't work, this has been evidenced by the controlling classes being able to make counters to this.  And if you're happy with the way things are, then quite frankly you deserve to be shot.

Change for the better will only come about by a catastrophic collapse of the current hierarchy and structure, because in all other scanarios the pattern is built in too strong to be anything other than self-perpetuating.

[CP5670]

I agree with you that the current cultural, economic and political systems of today are in a complete mess, probably well beyond repair, but this is exactly what is needed to put the final nails into the coffin of this structure and to bring about a new form of human existence from scratch.

Also, the entire concept of individuality and all related ideas (including that of fun or leisure) must completely fade out of today's culture if this so-called equality is to be upheld; otherwise, people will not and "should" not have an interest in anything that does not directly concern their affairs. Even then, individual lives will be of no importance in themselves (and rightly so); what will count is the well-being of the society insofar that it contributes to the progress of knowledge.

[wEvil]

I beleive its' possible to have a rational society that embraces individuality, they aren't mutually exclusive concepts, after all.

Anyway, it might help to expand on your concepts of individuality and conformism before you scare vehemently indivdual oddballs like me away!

[Blue Lion]

Originally posted by Kazashi
I'm sure that'd be nice and easy to believe if you didn't live in a country where your child died after less than a year of life. Of course you seem to have overlooked the point that children will still die whether the family has one child or five.

No actually I haven't, if your children are dying, stop having more

I hope you realise that this scenario also applies to "civilized" countries. Of course, to avoid chipping in for these people, you'd have to stop paying tax.

Sha-boing, you're getting the idea now. You have no idea how much I hate the 18 year old hooked on crack living in downtown Baltimore who keeps having babies, those she can't afford to keep with foodstamps, welfare and the like, she puts up for adoption. The same applies for them, stop having kids you can't afford.

All theological discussion aside, if you don't feel sorry or guilty about not lifting a finger, then so be it. Here's hoping that you don't find yourself in a similar situation. I'm sure there will be people willing to help, but then again there will be lots of people sitting there watching the 32nd series of The Simpsons, now purchased and produced by a Chinese company

If it does, it does, such is life. But I'll be damned if I'll run to rich people and try and guilt them into it. **** it, maybe I just have too much pride.

Not really, I was more amused at your attitude, as I continue to be. I must admit, it reminds me of the dole bludgers who appeared on radio to state their case that the country owed them a living.

No one owes anyone anything, this is the basis of my argument

A question for your question: who is "we"? Is a political boundary that important that you can refer to people within as "we"? Why is that "we" so different from the "we" as defined by the surface of this planet?

You've missed the point entirely, you wanna know who "we" is? "We" is me, my dad, my mom, my friends, my co-workers. Everyone who grew up, looked for a job, got one, went in and work 8 hours a day, to pay their bills so they could go into work again. Yes, I do work 50 hours a week, yes it is manual labor. You know what? So do my parents, so yes they did jolly ****ing well work for where they are today. They earned where they are today and I am grateful to them for it. And to show them how grateful I am, I will hold my own job, work my ass for myself and my kids when I get them. And no one will be able to tell me I didn't work for where I was today. There are people who worked for their jobs here, in Canada, in Mexico, in the Sudan, in Iraq, you know what? THEY deserve it, they worked their asses off to get it and deserve all that they've worked for.

I present another part of that argument - does your question imply that 3rd world countries don't work as hard? Of course! Since they don't have enough water available they must not work as hard to tend their farms! Hmmm, sarcasm tags would be great right about now.

Did they use all the water already? Was there an abundance of water there 10 years ago that I stole? No, it's these people are living in poor environments that can't support them. Blame their parents who had them and their people for staying there, stop blaming me. Blame god.

If you're so concerned about money, then it won't be good for you. It seems as though many people can't see past the competition aspect of economics - doesn't matter if it helps the whole because it might take away our customers.

Yah, silly me being concerned with money. Shame it pays for my house, truck, food, bills.

I guess that comes with the country you live in though: if the government can bend world trade rules to suit itself then it must be ok for the regular citizens to play by the same rules.

what rules have I bended?

If the betterment of your own country means the economic destruction of another, is that fine with you? Must be made easier since you don't have to look at them directly, TV's can be turned off, newspapers thrown out or burned, the internet can be filtered.

If you mean destruction by not giving charity to these people, then yes that is fine with me. If you mean destruction by the Nikes I'm wearing were made my some little boy in god knows where for 3 cents a day, that's not my fault. Please explain to me how that is my fault and I owe these people money.

Quite often the leaders don't know. Quite often the parents of the children don't know.

Again, that is misgovernment, blame them

Nike didn't need guns because they could get away with doing everything quietly.

Doing what quietly? If you mean paying governments to let them do this, see my above statement.

Did Snipes enter the NTF by stepping in guns blazing and demanding to be placed in a ranking position?

I'm assuming Nike=snipes and these governments are the NTF? That's a pretty poor analogy

Do they actually broadcast the documentaries of sweat shops, interviews with the workers, standover tactics of the companies etc on US television?

Yes they do

The workers are given "promises" of good pay and fair treatment before being seperated from their families, only to find out the harsh reality not long after.

And I can see how this forces me to help them.

Many South Korean "entertainment" facilities used to serve US G.I.'s also used the same lines to recruit South-ease Asian women as "waitresses", only to force them into being whores for those troops. In typical fashion, the G.I.'s don't care about how the women are treated because they get the good end of it.

You know what? That's our fault, doesn't mean you go to England and ask them to pay for these women, which is what you'd be asking.

[Blue Lion]

*sigh*

Originally posted by wEvil
US television is pretty infamous for its' lack of interest in foreign affairs.

Know why? Cause we don't really care.

And while we're on the subject of america - it's not your fault, but it is.

Before you say "huh" and stop reading - let me explain this statement.

Good, cause that made no sense

It is the fault of your leaders, and the people you allow to control you.

What is?

Obviously the onus is on them for the apparent behaviour of your country, however the general publics' continued reluctance to have so much as an iota of interest outside their own immediate lives means that by doing nothing you automatically accept a part of the blame.

So.......the fact a woman that gets raped outside my house is my fault because I didn't stop it?

Get Educated in whats going on around you

I don't care, educating me all you want is not going to make me care.


Rather than quote everything else you just said, I'll make it fairly simple. I am not required to do anything, it is not my fault they live there, just as much as it is not my fault I live here. I'm going to get up, go to work, come home and go to bed. If that makes me guilty of whatever, throw me in jail.

[wEvil]

Originally posted by Blue Lion
Know why? Cause we don't really care.

Well...that says it all then.  

So.......the fact a woman that gets raped outside my house is my fault because I didn't stop it?

To put it bluntly, yes.  I can't really beleive anyone could stand by and let that happen.

I don't care, educating me all you want is not going to make me care.

If you stopped arguing against everyone just for the sake of it and tried to understand what we're about you would.  

But fine, just go ahead an stick your head up your own arse like the other 5 billion morons in the world.  It not just yourselves you'll be punishing though, but you don't care about anyone else - so thats' OK.


*edit * and its bent, not bended.

[CP5670]

I beleive its' possible to have a rational society that embraces individuality, they aren't mutually exclusive concepts, after all.

Anyway, it might help to expand on your concepts of individuality and conformism before you scare vehemently indivdual oddballs like me away!

Think about it, though...all of the "problems" mentioned in this thread stem from the fact that individuals compete with different goals in mind. The entire concept of individuality implies a kind of chaos when multiple individuals coexist; that is the whole essence of individuality. If instead there is one super-organism of humanity, then and only then can it work towards a common purpose at full efficiency, and this is true rationality. As an analogy, think of what the cells that make up our bodies are capable of when working alone, and compare that to what they can do as an assemblage i.e. the human. Also, the so-called totalitarian governments throughout history are not good examples, since what happened there was that while most people lost their individuality, a select group of equally stupid people gained more individuality, and as we have seen, the gap between the two was what steered the nations into disaster. However, we can see that today's system of individuality is not much better.

Blame god.

Rather than quote everything you just said, I'll make it fairly simple. I am not required to do anything, it is not my fault they live there, just as much as it is not my fault I live here. I'm going to get up, go to work, come home and go to bed. If that makes me guilty of whatever, throw me in jail.

Very good point here. This is simply the way that today's system works, and trying to throw some silly popular ethics in there is just going to make an even bigger mess. Individuals have no logical reason to do anything that is not in their own interests by the very nature of the individual.

To put it bluntly, yes. I can't really beleive anyone could stand by and let that happen.

Well, he has a point. It is not his problem; it is the government's job to take care of that and thus hold things together, and if it is not, well, too bad.

[Blue Lion]

Originally posted by CP5670

[wEvil]

If everyone then lost that individuality to be absorbed by a super-organism then it pretty much defeats the object of being sentient at all?

Its the same argument....it wouldn't be worth knowing anything if we didnt have the individuality to apply to it.  Its our frame of reference in a relative universe that makes surviving worthwhile.

If you can't enjoy yourself once in a while whats' the point of bothering to breathe in and out?

blame god

I don't beleive in god and therefore refuse to blame it.

Well, he has a point. It is not his problem; it is the government's job to take care of that and thus hold things together, and if it is not, well, too bad.

Any system of govornment or a society will have to start with you.  If you don't care, there's no point in anyone else caring because you clearly are not interested in any greater good and would be useless and ultimately destructive to whatever society or ideal you subscribed to.

In essence it just comes down to your moral laziness.  And apathy seems to be the greatest tool to keep everyone down in recent history.

[CP5670]

If everyone then lost that individuality to be absorbed by a super-organism then it pretty much defeats the object of being sentient at all?

This is the thing though: there is nothing that precisely defines sentience. I could argue that the table in my room also has some degree of sentience. However, in the way we think of it, we can classify objects into different levels or stages of sentience; the difference between the level of sentience in the human and the society (the kind I talk of) is as great as that between the cell and the human.

Its the same argument....it wouldn't be worth knowing anything if we didnt have the individuality to apply to it.  Its our frame of reference in a relative universe that makes surviving worthwhile.

If you can't enjoy yourself once in a while whats' the point of bothering to breathe in and out?

No, no...the only reason we want to obtain knowledge is that all other objectives are logically contradictory, and frankly, we exist in this universe and we have to do something. (it is impossible to do truly nothing) Besides, happiness can easily be obtained by just using some narcotic brain stimulant, and this happiness would be great enough to make all other forms of happiness useless. They have already been able to instill the feeling of pleasure into a mouse, and in the future I have no doubt that the same can easily be done for a human. We can then all attain absolute happiness at all times, but what do we do after that?

Any system of govornment or a society will have to start with you. If you don't care, there's no point in anyone else caring because you clearly are not interested in any greater good and would be useless and ultimately destructive to whatever society or ideal you subscribed to.

In essence it just comes down to your moral laziness. And apathy seems to be the greatest tool to keep everyone down in recent history.

That is my whole point; the entire concepts of "I" and "you" cannot exist in the culture at all if this is to be true; there should only be "one." You cannot count on this "moral activeness" to have people acting in this "good" way.