Hi Eric,
I have taken a look at some of your writings on badtux and kuro5hin, and
found the experience enjoyable.
As for your outsourcing-as-slavery metaphor, I wonder if you might be
willing to explain it further. One thing that gives me pause is the
dichotomy you presuppose between us, who are free, and them, who are
enslaved. While I am thankful for the (for the time being) elevated
standard of living we have here, and for the fact that our government is
not wholly corrupt as it is in some places, what is the fundamental
difference between us and, say, the Indians who live in the world's
largest representative democracy (ridiculously corrupt though it may be)?
Perhaps, as an immigrant myself, I am missing the point, but it seems
that here in the US our destiny as a nation is shaped by the prevailing
financial powers - corporations and industry/professional associations
with their respective PACs - and also by the more vocal and/or wealthy
and/or politically inscendiary special interest groups (i.e. the
fundies, the one-legged bisexual dwarves, the oh-so-oppressed
minorities, Sierra Club, etc).
The destiny of the average pleb (such as you and me, presumably) is to
work for the benefit of our corporate masters, and in return be given
the means to maintain a family equipped with the average collection of
lifestyle-defining products purchased from these same corporations.
This seems very similar to what is happening to the non-agrarian pleb in
a place such as India, save for their inferior salaries and
protections. The difference seems in degree rather than principle, you
know what I mean?
(There is a difference with an overt dictatorship such as China, I grant
you that. But let's talk about some less radical example - India, the
new democracies of Central Europe, etc. Better yet, remember the leap
of IT/ semi industry to Ireland a few years back? Are they slaves, per
your metaphor? Or would you be inclined to agree that it is after all a
difference in degree, rather than a free/slave dichotomy?)
With outsourcing, our corporate masters have decided to hire some
cheaper plebs, who are as you rightly say less troublesome insofar as
regulations, lawsuits, human rights, environment, ethics, and such
things are concerned. Trouble is measured in dollars; less trouble
translates into bigger profits, as do smaller salaries. Why you say
outsourcing is not financially motivated, I am not sure. Perhaps if you
believe in that the primary motivator of those in power is to oppress,
then I can see how you may justify this position. I tend to think that
the fundamental nature of man is largely self-serving, and that the
primary motivation is wealth / power itself, with the evil that may or
may not befall the pleb in the process of these macroscopic trends is
just a side-effect that they don't much care about.
I rather doubt the owners of the semiconductor outfit you mentioned
thought to themselves, gee, let's poison some Chinese today and make
sure they are oppressed thereby. I think it much more likely that they
were concerned with their bottom line and simply didn't give a f*ck that
more babies in Guanzhou will be born with illnesses and deformities
while their parents deal with cancer due to cheap and unconstrained
chemical dumping. Indeed, it is not unlikely that some Chinese
corporate VP brokered the deal with their Chinese gov't counterparts
with the help of Chinese-staffed law firms, smiling all the way. Their
families will eat well; who cares about the rest. Does this not seem
more plausible to you?
Cheers,
Stan
.
-E