NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm going to be serious on this thread, out of actual, honest respect for the victims of the Holocaust.

So, I was on mauser.org, because one of their .243 "tanker" rifles fit my needs. And while I was there, I noticed that they advertise rifles that were supposedly built in concentration camps.

So, I looked into it further, and in one of their other ads, they also claim to sell a "bnz German K98k Rifle", the production run of which was purportedly done from 1940 to 1944 at Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp, under the "supervision" of the SS.

Further, their ad copy from a magazine claims "Only highly skilled and talented prisoners were allowed to work there. Fearing sabotage, the SS imposed a very tight quality control system which resulted in a higher-than-normal-quality rifle."

Naturally, the "system" was not likely based on bonuses or vacation incentives.

Now, the little tanker rifle I want is not from this lot, and was built by Serbians post-war.

But it raises the question: Would you buy something built by slave labor in a death camp? (If you aren't into guns, imagine it was something else you are into.)

Don't Americans buy stuff made in slave labor camps everyday though? What about the sweatshops that make our clothes, or shoes?

Don't Americans buy stuff made in slave labor camps everyday though? What about the sweatshops that make our clothes, or shoes?

Hm, that could be. I shop at Wal-mart, and what I buy there probably wasn't made by people who drove to work...

Somehow, the little SS lightning bolts and Death's Head markings on some of these rifles is even creepier yet...

Don't Americans buy stuff made in slave labor camps everyday though? What about the sweatshops that make our clothes, or shoes?

Yes, but to compare those to Nazi death camps isn't quite accurate.

And no, I wouldn't buy it. Its crass, and an insult to the victims.

I don't even buy Bayer aspirin.

Not if I knew it....The real fear comes from how many items have I already bought and didnt know they were made in a Deathcamp...

Yes, but to compare those to Nazi death camps isn't quite accurate.

And no, I wouldn't buy it. Its crass, and an insult to the victims.

What if it was only half the price of the alternative?

What if it was only half the price of the alternative?

Hmm, I suppose it depends on what I was buying it for. If, for example, I was a museum curator trying to purchase stuff for a WW2 or Holocaust exhibit, then maybe. But for my personal collection/enjoyment, no. I wouldn't sell out my principles for a bargain.

Not if I knew it....The real fear comes from how many items have I already bought and didnt know they were made in a Deathcamp...

That's kind of the jacked up thing...the company is actually going out of its way to advertise that these were produced in the Death Camp.

They're putting a "This is a way to remember, NEVER AGAIN!" kind of spin on it, but it still seems...off somehow.

I don't even buy Bayer aspirin.

But it's the 'wonder drug'... you're missing out. It's not like they're still producing Zyklon-B.

I wouldn't buy something made by a concentration camp worker, no. But I wouldn't be against buying a Mercedes if I had the cash, or a Mitsubishi, for that matter, if I were so inclined. Let bygones be bygones, I say.

Well, you can't change what has been done. If you were buying something brand-new from a forced labor camp that was still operational, I'd say you were supporting evil. As it is, all involved are probably long dead and the regime that established and operated those camps no longer exists. A good rifle (as long as it isn't overpriced due to the history) is never a bad thing.

I'm going to be serious on this thread, out of actual, honest respect for the victims of the Holocaust.

So, I was on mauser.org, because one of their .243 "tanker" rifles fit my needs. And while I was there, I noticed that they advertise rifles that were supposedly built in concentration camps.

So, I looked into it further, and in one of their other ads, they also claim to sell a "bnz German K98k Rifle", the production run of which was purportedly done from 1940 to 1944 at Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp, under the "supervision" of the SS.

Further, their ad copy from a magazine claims "Only highly skilled and talented prisoners were allowed to work there. Fearing sabotage, the SS imposed a very tight quality control system which resulted in a higher-than-normal-quality rifle."

Naturally, the "system" was not likely based on bonuses or vacation incentives.

Now, the little tanker rifle I want is not from this lot, and was built by Serbians post-war.

But it raises the question: Would you buy something built by slave labor in a death camp? (If you aren't into guns, imagine it was something else you are into.)

Yes. A necklace made out of human teeth and threaded with sinew.

But it's the 'wonder drug'... you're missing out. It's not like they're still producing Zyklon-B.

I wouldn't buy something made by a concentration camp worker, no. But I wouldn't be against buying a Mercedes if I had the cash, or a Mitsubishi, for that matter, if I were so inclined. Let bygones be bygones, I say.

Considering it was mainly cynanide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zyklon_B)...

Well, you can't change what has been done. If you were buying something brand-new from a forced labor camp that was still operational, I'd say you were supporting evil. As it is, all involved are probably long dead and the regime that established and operated those camps no longer exists. A good rifle (as long as it isn't overpriced due to the history) is never a bad thing.

I wouldn't say its overpriced, at least not by much. Milsurp rifles have been going up for a while, and pretty much only the Russian Mosin Nagants are still particularly cheap.

Thinks like British Lee Enfields, American Springfields, etc, have all been going up.

The price is decent, but clearly includes a premium for the historical aspect.

Yes. A necklace made out of human teeth and threaded with sinew.

Well, that does raise the question of products made of actual human remains.

Considering 3 million Poles died in concentration camps, I'm going to say no. The thought of one of my distant relatives being worked to death kind of sours me on the idea.

But it's the 'wonder drug'... you're missing out. It's not like they're still producing Zyklon-B.

I wouldn't buy something made by a concentration camp worker, no. But I wouldn't be against buying a Mercedes if I had the cash, or a Mitsubishi, for that matter, if I were so inclined. Let bygones be bygones, I say.

As far as I know, Mercedes didn't manufacture gas chambers. If they had something specifically to do with the Holocaust or the SS, as opposed to Nazi-era Germany as a whole, I'd welcome that information. I have nothing against Germany; my father's uncle fought for Germany during WWII. I do, however, have something against building a company on human experimentation, and while it was indeed a long time ago and has little relevance to the company today, I cannot square it away with my conscience.

As far as I know, Mercedes didn't manufacture gas chambers. If they had something specifically to do with the Holocaust or the SS, as opposed to Nazi-era Germany as a whole, I'd welcome that information. I have nothing against Germany; my father's uncle fought for Germany during WWII. I do, however, have something against building a company on human experimentation, and while it was indeed a long time ago and has little relevance to the company today, I cannot square it away with my conscience.

They used slave labor, and had exclusive contracts with the Nazi regime. That means that some of their products were produced by concentration camp workers, regardless whether they actively killed those slaves if their perfomance wasn't ideal.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1095/did-krups-braun-and-mercedes-benz-make-nazi-concentration-camp-ovens

During the war the company used thousands of slaves and forced laborers including Jews, foreigners, and POWs. According to historian Bernard Bellon (Mercedes in Peace and War, 1990), at least eight Jews were murdered by DB managers or SS men at a plant in occupied Poland. There was a report that Daimler-Benz built mobile poison gas vans, but this has never been corroborated and is doubtful

Possibly for the historical value of the item.

Having an SS mauser in your gun collection would be pretty neat though.

Honestly If i had the money I would buy 2.

then donate one to a holocaust museum.
Then make up a story about my grand dad receiving this rifle as a gift from the Jews working at a concentration camp he helped liberate and pass the rifle on to my kids.

If I intended to use it as a part of a tribute to said concentration camp's survivors, yes.

Not otherwise.

Then make up a story about my grand dad receiving this rifle as a gift from the Jews working at a concentration camp he helped liberate and pass the rifle on to my kids.

I think this is one of those times that you've got to make sure you're dead before they're old enough and smart enough to actually look in to it further. Nothing spells an awkward Christmas like finding out your dad lied about something related to the Holocaust.

I think this is one of those times that you've got to make sure you're dead before they're old enough and smart enough to actually look in to it further. Nothing spells an awkward Christmas like finding out your dad lied about something related to the Holocaust.

that will be hard because he did serve in Europe, and was among first to reach to Buchenwald concentration camp.(well we think from pictures). So i guess the only way would be to get the serial number form the rifle and see it was made elsewhere. and if they do all of that I think they will be able to get the joke.

But it raises the question: Would you buy something built by slave labor in a death camp? (If you aren't into guns, imagine it was something else you are into.)

No.

Don't Americans buy stuff made in slave labor camps everyday though? What about the sweatshops that make our clothes, or shoes?

I try to buy mostly products made in US, Canada, and other nations with decent labor standards; sort of my way of boycotting this kind of thing but too bad not many people do.

Possibly for the historical value of the item.

Having an SS mauser in your gun collection would be pretty neat though.

^^ This

I'm going to be serious on this thread, out of actual, honest respect for the victims of the Holocaust.

So, I was on mauser.org, because one of their .243 "tanker" rifles fit my needs. And while I was there, I noticed that they advertise rifles that were supposedly built in concentration camps.

So, I looked into it further, and in one of their other ads, they also claim to sell a "bnz German K98k Rifle", the production run of which was purportedly done from 1940 to 1944 at Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp, under the "supervision" of the SS.

Further, their ad copy from a magazine claims "Only highly skilled and talented prisoners were allowed to work there. Fearing sabotage, the SS imposed a very tight quality control system which resulted in a higher-than-normal-quality rifle."

Naturally, the "system" was not likely based on bonuses or vacation incentives.

Now, the little tanker rifle I want is not from this lot, and was built by Serbians post-war.

But it raises the question: Would you buy something built by slave labor in a death camp? (If you aren't into guns, imagine it was something else you are into.)

FOR SALE: a Product of Human Misery. I saw the adds in SGN too-and honestly, the idea of such a thing brings to mind the thought of buying cursed goods merely for the cache of their being cursed.

The thing that occurred to me second, was that there are skinheaded scum out there who'd buy it with their peckers all-a-hard at the idea of where it came from.

I'm not talking about people with a genuine interest in history, now, but people who want to re-create a spectacularly evil chapter of it-the guys who drool over Nazi Memorabilia and have a fetishistic love for the Third Reich in all it's foul corruption.

FOR SALE: a Product of Human Misery. I saw the adds in SGN too-and honestly, the idea of such a thing brings to mind the thought of buying cursed goods merely for the cache of their being cursed.

The thing that occurred to me second, was that there are skinheaded scum out there who'd buy it with their peckers all-a-hard at the idea of where it came from.

I'm not talking about people with a genuine interest in history, now, but people who want to re-create a spectacularly evil chapter of it-the guys who drool over Nazi Memorabilia and have a fetishistic love for the Third Reich in all it's foul corruption.

What about those of us who just thought they had good fashion taste?

I will admit, I like the SS Uniform, despite the horrible and terrible things the SS have done.

Hell, I've thought about re-creating an SS uniform from time to time.

Possibly for the historical value of the item.

Having an SS mauser in your gun collection would be pretty neat though.

Agreed (on both points :p). It really depends why you are buying it. If you are buying for historical value, because you want a WWII gun in your collection, then yes. I think it's important to remeber what happened in those times and objects are often increadibly powerful reminders of what people went through.

If your just considering it because you want a nice gun, then no, it's the type of memorabilia where it's history is far more important than the utility of the object itself.

No.

Depends on the quality

Agreed (on both points :p). It really depends why you are buying it. If you are buying for historical value, because you want a WWII gun in your collection, then yes. I think it's important to remeber what happened in those times and objects are often increadibly powerful reminders of what people went through.

If your just considering it because you want a nice gun, then no, it's the type of memorabilia where it's history is far more important than the utility of the object itself.

Their are a lot of guns out their. Their are a lot of WW2 guns out their. No one's ever going to own every single gun. Why get this particular one?

Their are a lot of guns out their. Their are a lot of WW2 guns out their. No one's ever going to own every single gun. Why get this particular one?

Because it is a more significant and real reminder of one of the darker times in human history, and I think that's something we should all remember to avoid repeating it.

Of course, that was only if I was specifically making a collection around WWII, I wouldn't buy this particular gun for any other reason (actually as a rule I wouldn't buy a gun full stop unless it was for historical interest).

Would you buy something built by slave labor in a death camp? (If you aren't into guns, imagine it was something else you are into.)

Hell no. Well... only if the money goes to some anti-nazi organisation, like Wiesenthal's, or to KZ-victims' organisations.

Depends on the price.

Most of us buy products made by child labourers in the Far East anyway.

Probbaly not from an active camp, but, that said, I can imagine few occassions when I would have any cause to buy such materials.

<snip>

Well, I wouldn't buy any kind of gun, so that kind of makes the question highly rhetorical.

That said, years ago I inherited an old foldable umbrella from my gran. And I always found that little band that you can put around your wrist very odd, until one day I examined it closer and found it to be made from human hair. It freaked me out quite a bit... I don't know any details about it, but given the age of that thing and that all this happened in Germany, I started wondering what kind of past that umbrella had.

But they are such lovely lampshades...

No I would not.

Yes, but to compare those to Nazi death camps isn't quite accurate.
Comparing them to Nazi slave labor camps fairly is however.

Yes I would.

Comparing them to Nazi slave labor camps fairly is however.

Indeed. And don't forget the childlabour - plenty of that still found in the wonderful products one can buy at walmart. Exploitation of humans - and animals for that matter - is after all good for discounts.

No i don't think i'd buy something made from a concentration camp, unless i had no choice (say if i was starving and they were selling food i'd have to).
pretty grim topic you're discussing here.

pretty grim topic you're discussing here.

Why ? Because the average person does not WANT to know what they are buying ? Where and how it was made and if someone suffered and/or died for it ?

Too bad. People should start being more aware of what they endorse with their money, and stop hiding behind the "wir haben es nicht gewusst".

Now, everybody who owns nothing which was made through exploitation and suffering - raise your hands. I fear I cannot.

I'm going to be serious on this thread, out of actual, honest respect for the victims of the Holocaust.

So, I was on mauser.org, because one of their .243 "tanker" rifles fit my needs. And while I was there, I noticed that they advertise rifles that were supposedly built in concentration camps.

So, I looked into it further, and in one of their other ads, they also claim to sell a "bnz German K98k Rifle", the production run of which was purportedly done from 1940 to 1944 at Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp, under the "supervision" of the SS.

Further, their ad copy from a magazine claims "Only highly skilled and talented prisoners were allowed to work there. Fearing sabotage, the SS imposed a very tight quality control system which resulted in a higher-than-normal-quality rifle."

Naturally, the "system" was not likely based on bonuses or vacation incentives.

Now, the little tanker rifle I want is not from this lot, and was built by Serbians post-war.

But it raises the question: Would you buy something built by slave labor in a death camp? (If you aren't into guns, imagine it was something else you are into.)

If said item fit my needs the best then yes I would.

Why ? Because the average person does not WANT to know what they are buying ? Where and how it was made and if someone suffered and/or died for it ?

Too bad. People should start being more aware of what they endorse with their money, and stop hiding behind the "wir haben es nicht gewusst".

Now, everybody who owns nothing which was made through exploitation and suffering - raise your hands. I fear I cannot.

I agree with the moral principle you're saying, as i obviously wouldn't like the idea of buying things made in concentration camps and would avoid sweat shop clothes. (to be fair i hardly buy enough clothes for myself anyway)
Then again i might say that i have limited control over who sweat shops clothes anyway, that they'd just go to waste if i didn't buy them. That it should be the responsibility of the store manager to make sure where their produce comes from, because i don't have the time or money to make the morally right choice.
what does "wir haben es nicht gewusst" mean?

what does "wir haben es nicht gewusst" mean?

"We didn't know" in German. It was something a lot of German citizens answered right after the war when asked why they had allowed the deportations, torture, executions and so on to happen. It has come to carry a secondary meaning of "refusing to acknowledge what happens right in front of you because it would force you to do something".

no.

No, I would not buy something that I knew had been made in a concentration camp.

If we're talking about an item with a dark history, like items made in Nazi Germany, I would not buy it because I would not be able to enjoy having it in my possession. Its history would haunt it, to me. I would not want that (mental) negativity in my house. I have inherited a couple of items from my grandparents that bother me this way -- some old 78rpm LPs that were made in Nazi Germany (nobody realized that until an audiophile friend, examining the discs, noticed the swastika engraved next to the labels) and some clothing and jewelry items made from animals that are now endangered and the trade in them banned. These things are a small burden to me. They came into our possession innocently (or at least ignorantly), but the history they picked up over time is too heavy.

If we're talking about a new item, I most certainly would never buy an item made by concentration camp or slave labor. Even if I didn't know whether the given item had been made that way, if I knew that the country of origin used such a system, I would not buy anything made in that country.

In the modern world, there are many necessary items that we can't avoid buying that are made using extremely questionable -- and outright abusive -- labor practices. This bothers me, and I find myself "politicizing" my shopping quite a lot. Still, I can't make a dent in the system, and I hate that.

The feeling that someone or something suffered so that I could own some minor object is something that I can't get past.

I'm not touching this one, not even with a 40 ft. pole, in honor of those who died and those who have loved one who died during the Holocaust.

No, I would not buy something that I knew had been made in a concentration camp.

If we're talking about an item with a dark history, like items made in Nazi Germany, I would not buy it because I would not be able to enjoy having it in my possession. Its history would haunt it, to me. I would not want that (mental) negativity in my house. I have inherited a couple of items from my grandparents that bother me this way -- some old 78rpm LPs that were made in Nazi Germany (nobody realized that until an audiophile friend, examining the discs, noticed the swastika engraved next to the labels) and some clothing and jewelry items made from animals that are now endangered and the trade in them banned. These things are a small burden to me. They came into our possession innocently (or at least ignorantly), but the history they picked up over time is too heavy.

If we're talking about a new item, I most certainly would never buy an item made by concentration camp or slave labor. Even if I didn't know whether the given item had been made that way, if I knew that the country of origin used such a system, I would not buy anything made in that country.

In the modern world, there are many necessary items that we can't avoid buying that are made using extremely questionable -- and outright abusive -- labor practices. This bothers me, and I find myself "politicizing" my shopping quite a lot. Still, I can't make a dent in the system, and I hate that.

The feeling that someone or something suffered so that I could own some minor object is something that I can't get past.

How do you always say what I mean to say but more eloquently?

I bet its because you sleep more.

I'm not touching this one, not even with a 40 ft. pole, in honor of those who died and those who have loved one who died during the Holocaust.

A 50 foot pole? With a bayonet, hand grenade and shotgun on the end?

A 50 foot pole? With a bayonet, hand grenade and shotgun on the end?

Was it made in a concentration camp? Because, seriously, that sounds like a fun toy.

How do you always say what I mean to say but more eloquently?

I bet its because you sleep more.
I just drink more (fair trade) coffee. :D

Was it made in a concentration camp? Because, seriously, that sounds like a fun toy.

Get yer mind out o' the gutter, mate.

I just drink more (fair trade) coffee. :D

I would if I could stand it. Does tea (orange peco and green) count?

Get yer mind out o' the gutter, mate.

What? We weren't talking about *my* fifty foot pole. We were talking about a theoretical fifty foot pole with a shotgun, bayonet, and a hand grenade.

I would if I could stand it. Does tea (orange peco and green) count?
Apparently not, or you wouldn't have made that first post. :p

What? We weren't talking about *my* fifty foot pole. We were talking about a theoretical fifty foot pole with a shotgun, bayonet, and a hand grenade.

You do like anything that goes BOOM, eh? :p

Apparently not, or you wouldn't have made that first post. :p

When you are right, you are right...

You do like anything that goes BOOM, eh? :p

Actually I prefer the "ssht" when it's silenced.

Actually I prefer the "ssht" when it's silenced.

Lol!

If the proceeds went to charity, sure.

I am not comfortable with helping anyone profit off such a thing, and I honestly wouldn't want to own it at all. If I were giving it to someone else and if 100% of my money was going to some good cause, then maybe.

If the proceeds went to charity, sure.

I am not comfortable with helping anyone profit off such a thing, and I honestly wouldn't want to own it at all. If I were giving it to someone else and if 100% of my money was going to some good cause, then maybe.
I'd rather just write a check to the charity. No need for the blood-soaked token, thanks.

I'd rather just write a check to the charity. No need for the blood-soaked token, thanks.

Indeed. About the only way I can come up with that I would buy such a thing is if I had an inexplicable need to raise money for a good cause while simultaneously donating an exhibit to a Holocaust museum or something.

Don't we do this anyways - how else do you think Walmart gets those everyday low prices?

Indeed. About the only way I can come up with that I would buy such a thing is if I had an inexplicable need to raise money for a good cause while simultaneously donating an exhibit to a Holocaust museum or something.
Well, yes, I suppose if you had to do both those things just right and perfectly timed to keep a nuclear device from exploding in orbit, which would cause the space station to come plummeting to Earth in a massive fireball that would destroy a major city. Or something. :D

Don't we do this anyways - how else do you think Walmart gets those everyday low prices?
I don't shop at Wal-mart. Guess why?

I'd rather just write a check to the charity. No need for the blood-soaked token, thanks.

what if you buy the item to give to a charity such as a holocaust museum?

"We didn't know" in German. It was something a lot of German citizens answered right after the war when asked why they had allowed the deportations, torture, executions and so on to happen. It has come to carry a secondary meaning of "refusing to acknowledge what happens right in front of you because it would force you to do something".

ah, the diffusion of responsibility. Poor Germans of all the leaders they had to get at that time it had to be a very confused person.

Orthodox Jewish scholars have debated a similar issue - is it ethical to use the medical knowledge that was acquired via experimentation on concentration camp inmates?

One argument (which I like) holds that if the knowledge is used to save lives, then those who were experimented on will not have died in vain. A sub-argument (which I like even better) holds that if the knowledge is used to save Jewish lives, then it is serving a purpose opposed to that of the Nazi scientists.

So my answer is, only if the item is to be used for a holy purpose. Which 99% of the time, means no.

what if you buy the item to give to a charity such as a holocaust museum?
They can use my check to buy it directly. That way I don't have to touch it at all and risk getting its karma-cooties. :p

I don't shop at Wal-mart. Guess why?

Im going to imagine for the same reasons I dont.

Im going to imagine for the same reasons I dont.
Well, I've never been caught shoplifting there, so... Hm....

:p

Well, I've never been caught shoplifting there, so... Hm....

:p

I was thinking more along the lines of 'streaking'.


What? Dont look at me like that. You expect me to believe that LG, Neo Art, and myself are the only ones who go streaking in Walmarts?

I was thinking more along the lines of 'streaking'.


What? Dont look at me like that. You expect me to believe that LG, Neo Art, and myself are the only ones who go streaking in Walmarts?
Video or it never happened. :D

yes, cause it's a valuable piece of history I'd like to own.

With the exception of a museum or something like that they should not be able to buy them. Generally we are talking about collectors of some type. It is sad that there is even a market.



One further thing it also forms proof to any moron who thinks it never happened. Not that it is a good idea or beneficial to anyone to own any of this stuff.

I don't shop at Wal-mart. Guess why?

Does that make you feel moral?

Does that make you feel moral?
Dingdingdingding!!! We have a winner!!! How ever did you guess?

Actually, nothing makes me feel "moral" because I do not concern myself with questions of "morality", preferring to base my life on an ethical code rather than a moral one. Therefore, no, not shopping at Wal-mart does not make me feel moral.

That said, the reason I do not shop at Wal-mart is because I disapprove of how that business operates enough to decide I do not want to give them my business. The fact that the bulk of their merchandise is manufactured without any accountability for labor conditions is just one part of what puts me off them. Other parts include their relations with their own employees, their methods of buiding market share, which I consider unfair business practices, and the fact that their prices really are not that much better than other companies that are more socially responsible in some ways, such as Target (which has somewhat better employment practices) and IKEA (which offers much more transparency about the origins of its products).

Because my ethics require me to care about stuff like that, I do not shop at Wal-mart.

I am not comfortable with helping anyone profit off such a thing, and I honestly wouldn't want to own it at all. If I were giving it to someone else and if 100% of my money was going to some good cause, then maybe.

I've noticed a number of people have mentioned this issue of where the money went.

You would think the advertising company could at least make a gesture to pretend to back up their "Never Forget" spin on this by giving some of the proceeds to a Shoah foundation or something, but nope.

Evidently, even now when the margins on firearms are even fatter than usual, this is strictly for profit.

I don't shop at Wal-mart. Guess why?

But a lot of people do... and a lot of us wear things like shirts or sneakers of dubious provenance, also. And diamonds hold a premium. Those kinds of factors that slide by below the consciousness of most of us - which I think is what our friendly ghost was indirectly aiming us at.

I've never really got the whole sweatshops are bad thing myself... Its not as if people are forced to work there. They come freely in search of money.

I've never really got the whole sweatshops are bad thing myself... Its not as if people are forced to work there. They come freely in search of money.

Perhaps you should research them a tiny, teensy weensy bit more.

I've never really got the whole sweatshops are bad thing myself... Its not as if people are forced to work there. They come freely in search of money.

This is true. Of their own free will (and sometimes, under coercion or compulsion, but we'll ignore that, eh?) they come.

They make the choice, of their own free will, to work for an insignificant gesture of remuneration... as opposed to choosing, of their own free will, to starve to death.

This is true. Of their own free will (and sometimes, under coercion or compulsion, but we'll ignore that, eh?) they come.

They make the choice, of their own free will, to work for an insignificant gesture of remuneration... as opposed to choosing, of their own free will, to starve to death.

So they choose to take the job that pays money so they can eat instead of a worse job or starving to death. Damn those evil sweatshop owners :rolleyes:

I will however concede the point about coercion and compulsion and am open to further discussion.

Not that it is a good idea or beneficial to anyone to own any of this stuff.

Interesting idea. Why?

Assume - for example - a bed. Made by concentration camp prisoners... or used by them... how would that affect whether or not benefit was obtained from sleeping on it?

Not that it is a good idea or beneficial to anyone to own any of this stuff.
Also I believe it was mentioned that the guns are of higher quality, due to the controls that were in place.

So they choose to take the job that pays money so they can eat instead of a worse job or starving to death. Damn those evil sweatshop owners :rolleyes:


They take the job that might or might not pay ENOUGH to stop them starving to death anyway. Leading to things like higher child mortality. It certainly doesn't enable them to invest in things like clothing, decent housing, medicines... heating/cooling. Luxuries like... shoes.

So - yes, those sweatshop owners are 'evil'. They aren't spending money on a living wage, they are spending money on the absolute minimum they can spend. And if the workers organised to force the price up, the company would relocate.

We need UNIVERSAL fair trade law.

We need UNIVERSAL fair trade law.
Communism lets the terrorists win.

They take the job that might or might not pay ENOUGH to stop them starving to death anyway. Leading to things like higher child mortality. It certainly doesn't enable them to invest in things like clothing, decent housing, medicines... heating/cooling. Luxuries like... shoes.

So - yes, those sweatshop owners are 'evil'. They aren't spending money on a living wage, they are spending money on the absolute minimum they can spend. And if the workers organised to force the price up, the company would relocate.

We need UNIVERSAL fair trade law.

Oh come now. They're obviously offering something slightly above par for wages in the local area to ensure people actually come and work for them. Therefore this is obviously enough to pay for a local lifestyle. Is your entire point just "Living in poor countries stinks"?

Oh come now. They're obviously offering something slightly above par for wages in the local area to ensure people actually come and work for them. Therefore this is obviously enough to pay for a local lifestyle. Is your entire point just "Living in poor countries stinks"?

Who defends sweat shops?

I think his point is that the labor is exploited by MNCs. Its not about the local market, its about human rights.

Dingdingdingding!!! We have a winner!!! How ever did you guess?

Actually, nothing makes me feel "moral" because I do not concern myself with questions of "morality", preferring to base my life on an ethical code rather than a moral one. Therefore, no, not shopping at Wal-mart does not make me feel moral.

That said, the reason I do not shop at Wal-mart is because I disapprove of how that business operates enough to decide I do not want to give them my business. The fact that the bulk of their merchandise is manufactured without any accountability for labor conditions is just one part of what puts me off them. Other parts include their relations with their own employees, their methods of buiding market share, which I consider unfair business practices, and the fact that their prices really are not that much better than other companies that are more socially responsible in some ways, such as Target (which has somewhat better employment practices) and IKEA (which offers much more transparency about the origins of its products).

Because my ethics require me to care about stuff like that, I do not shop at Wal-mart.
Are the people who shop at Wal-mart because they can't afford to shop other places unethical? What about the people who work there?

Who defends sweat shops?

I think his point is that the labor is exploited by MNCs. Its not about the local market, its about human rights.

So you mean Articles 23 & 24?

Article 23

1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.


Unless the sweatshops have a monopoly on jobs they couldn't break these if they wanted to because no-one would work for them...

Unless the sweatshops have a monopoly on jobs they couldn't break these if they wanted to because no-one would work for them...
Are you kidding? If you are, please tell us. Because right now you sound like the most heartless bastard alive.

Are you kidding? If you are, please tell us. Because right now you sound like the most heartless bastard alive.

Note: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an incredibly vague document. Your interpretations may vary.

Back on topic though how do you propose we improve conditions? Boycott the sweatshops? They close. Congratulations, these workers now have no jobs at all in Poorland where they subsequently beg/steal/get worse job.

The solution has nothing to do with market forces or economics. That's what caused the problem in the first place.

I don't have a win-win answer for you. But my non-answer sure as hell beats your "let the poor people rot" solution.

The solution has nothing to do with market forces or economics. That's what caused the problem in the first place.

I don't have a win-win answer for you. But my non-answer sure as hell beats your "let the poor people rot" solution.

So instead of a small step along the path of improvement your answer is... nothing.

I am interested in what this "problem" of which you speak is and how market forces/economics caused it.

So instead of a small step along the path of improvement your answer is... nothing.

I am interested in what this "problem" of which you speak is and how market forces/economics caused it.

My answer isn't we do nothing, its I'm not equipped to give you an answer ask someone smarter or more powerful. I'm sorry that wasn't clear.

The problem is that people in countries who live in abject poverty and are forced to work in awful and disgusting conditions for ludicrous wages. Market forces and capitalist economics caused it because we as consumers demand the lowest prices for mass produced products and the only way producers can keep up with demand is to give those poor people we were talking about earlier (I know you already forgot about them, that's why I brought them up again) a penny a week for their 20-hour work day.

My answer isn't we do nothing, its I'm not equipped to give you an answer ask someone smarter or more powerful. I'm sorry that wasn't clear.

The problem is that people in countries who live in abject poverty and are forced to work in awful and disgusting conditions for ludicrous wages. Market forces and capitalist economics caused it because we as consumers demand the lowest prices for mass produced products and the only way producers can keep up with demand is to give those poor people we were talking about earlier (I know you already forgot about them, that's why I brought them up again) a penny a week for their 20-hour work day.

And I maintain this is impossible. If the conditions and wages are worse than those availible elsewhere locally then said people will not work at this hypothetical factory. As long as the factory does not have a monopoly on labour people will be equally good working there than anywhere else they could locally.

And I maintain this is impossible. If the conditions and wages are worse than those availible elsewhere locally then said people will not work at this hypothetical factory. As long as the factory does not have a monopoly on labour people will be equally good working there than anywhere else they could locally.

Those people on the streets asking for your money, I know they are just there because of their laziness and alcoholism. And those single moms who work three jobs - its just because they want the extra money and don't care about their children. The guys selling drugs, they could just as easily make as much money mopping floors, but selling drugs at least gets them fresh air.

The market never does anything bad! Worship it as a God.

Have you ever traveled outside of your bubble?

How about I ask it this way - what do you think would happen to wages without a minimum wage?

Those people on the streets asking for your money, I know they are just there because of their laziness and alcoholism. And those single moms who work three jobs - its just because they want the extra money and don't care about their children. The guys selling drugs, they could just as easily make as much money mopping floors, but selling drugs at least gets them fresh air.

The market never does anything bad! Worship it as a God.

Have you ever traveled outside of your bubble?

How about I ask it this way - what do you think would happen to wages without a minimum wage?

Have you been missing all my disclaimers? The entire theory only works in a competitive labour market with enough jobs to meet demand.

The state has a role to play in these conditions, both with welfare and regulation of the market.

As for minimum wage... If there were an excess of job supply, wages would be unchanged, being higher than minimum already. In a situation where there was an excess of people needing jobs, wages would drop. However more people would have jobs. This does not make removing minimum wages right if the equilibrium wage was below substinence, another example of where the state must intervene.

However for the state to intervene requires the state to have money, which foreign investement provides.

If there were an excess of job supply, wages would be unchanged
I took macro too. Now show me a market where demand exceeds supply where labor is concerned.

This isn't an exercise for ECON201. It isn't an academic question. And you're gunna have to show me those "disclaimers".

I took macro too. Now show me a market where demand exceeds supply where labor is concerned.

This isn't an exercise for ECON201. It isn't an academic question. And you're gunna have to show me those "disclaimers".




Unless the sweatshops have a monopoly on jobs

As long as the factory does not have a monopoly on labour

And coming out of hypothetical land a market where demand exceeds supply for jobs does not exists as far as I know.

Ah, I'm sorry I mistook your defense of sweatshops for an actual defense of sweatshops.

I realize what you were doing now is talking about a practical, real-life problem hypothetically.

Oh come now. They're obviously offering something slightly above par for wages in the local area to ensure people actually come and work for them. Therefore this is obviously enough to pay for a local lifestyle. Is your entire point just "Living in poor countries stinks"?

If the local area wage is nothing, then slightly above that... is slightly above nothing.

Moving a huge international body into the area to capitalise on that is tantamount to enslaving them. They're NOT going to refuse the pittance the companies are willing to pay... because only watching 4 of your children starving to death rather than 6 is sufficient incentive.

But, at the same time, there is no potential to improve that situation - indeed, the market is held DOWN by those huge companies, who will resist any motion towards equity. They'll refuse to pay more, they'll relocate to another poor area if they could be forced to pay more, and they'll capitalise on the local economic and political systems to maintain their workforce.

Why does the Indonesian worker DESERVE less recompense for his work than you would? Because that's what you've got to argue, to argue AGAINST fair trade.

So instead of a small step along the path of improvement your answer is... nothing.


Why take a small step?

Why not take a larger step, and dictate that multinationals must pay a fair wage (which can be adjusted according to cost of living, reassed periodically)?

The only argument against that... is that we oppose control on business.

In other words - the dollar is worth more than the worker.

And I maintain this is impossible. If the conditions and wages are worse than those availible elsewhere locally then said people will not work at this hypothetical factory. As long as the factory does not have a monopoly on labour people will be equally good working there than anywhere else they could locally.

You assume there are no other factors.

Yet your own assumption is flawed, because the multinational is a factor - it invests capital in the locality, which already changes the landscape.

The equilibrium is destroyed - the locals cannot afford to inject capital, so they have the choice of working for the new supply-and-demand focus on their local economy, or not working. It's how 'company towns' work.

It's effective slavery.

Just a thought - what better gun for Nazi hunting than a gun intended for use BY the Nazis? The justice would be sweet.

The Mauser is a solid rifle, and the object is not responsible for the manner of its creation. The German Nazi regime is long gone, and the purchase would not support further slave labor. I see no moral problem with buying it.

That aid, I'm saving up for an M1A :D It'll be a while though - not cheap.

Having had grandparents in them, I think a simple "No" will suffice.

I kill another thread?

Having had grandparents in them, I think a simple "No" will suffice.

I kill another thread?

How does having grandparents in them answer the question?

every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in. So, no.

every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in. So, no.

You hath succeeded in confusing me.

every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in. So, no.

Errr... surely, every dollar you spend is a vote for what someone ELSE believes in?

Only by accident.

Only by accident.

I think I get it now. Does China have them? Think about THAT.

I think I get it now. Does China have them? Think about THAT.
Fairly lame working conditions =/= slavery and death on a mass scale. C'mon here.

Fairly lame working conditions =/= slavery and death on a mass scale. C'mon here.

But does slavery and death = slavery and death?

Fairly lame working conditions =/= slavery and death on a mass scale. C'mon here.

Every ting we see is a cover up. The real labour comes from political dissidents...

You hath succeeded in confusing me.

Poor thing. You only buy stuff if you like it. And if you like it, that means you believe in it (in some sense).

But does slavery and death = slavery and death?
Well yes.
Every ting we see is a cover up. The real labour comes from political dissidents...
They must be really, oustandingly industrious. And plentiful.

Why would I not? If I don't buy them, somebody else will. Unless there's a grassroots movement to prevent it, it's not like a single person not buying them will make a difference.

It's slave labour, after all. Not much of an overhaul, other than shoveling corpses of overworked workers.

Well yes.

They must be really, oustandingly industrious. And plentiful.

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Extreme_sarcasm

Well yes.


So... if the workforce is compelled to remain in place and in a certain form of employment (which would be slavery) and there is also appreciable loss of life...

So... if the workforce is compelled to remain in place and in a certain form of employment (which would be slavery) and there is also appreciable loss of life...
Uhu... I also have to do this in England when I finish uni. OH NO EVERYTHING IS SLAVERY AND DEATH.

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Extreme_sarcasm
Buh. Sorry.

Buh. Sorry.

I'm was actually only being a little sarcastic. I didn't expect you to get that. I was also trying to make myself lookalike a crazed conspirasy theorist.

Uhu... I also have to do this in England when I finish uni. OH NO EVERYTHING IS SLAVERY AND DEATH.

And, again, this time in words.

Any language. Pick one.

And, again, this time in words.

Any language. Pick one.
If "you are compelled to work and death is a feature" = slavery and death, everything is slavery. Tada.

If "you are compelled to work and death is a feature" = slavery and death, everything is slavery. Tada.

Yeah.....

I was rather thinking of the control the central Chinese regime has over it's population, and the fact that they have already killed more (for example) members of Falun Gong than there are people in Israel.

Yeah.....

I was rather thinking of the control the central Chinese regime has over it's population, and the fact that they have already killed more (for example) members of Falun Gong than there are people in Israel.

Statistics are fairly futile when it comes to China. The sheer scale of its actions tend to have much larger headcounts due to population alone.

Statistics are fairly futile when it comes to China. The sheer scale of its actions tend to have much larger headcounts due to population alone.

Yeah. Killing people is probably like getting licked by kittens, in China.

Yeah it's just sheer numbers and now even the Chinese aren't too phased by it anymore.

The only one's that could hope to compare are the people of "Thank you, Come again".

The only one's that could hope to compare are the people of "Thank you, Come again".

Yeah, that won't happen for the main reason that India is a liberal democracy.

Yeah, that won't happen for the main reason that India is a liberal democracy.

That's one cow I wouldn't try to tip, though.

But a lot of people do... and a lot of us wear things like shirts or sneakers of dubious provenance, also. And diamonds hold a premium. Those kinds of factors that slide by below the consciousness of most of us - which I think is what our friendly ghost was indirectly aiming us at.
Other people's failure to think about what they are doing is of no concern to me when it comes to making decisions about what I will do or won't do. I was saying something about myself, not about humanity in general.

And to be entirely honest, my boycott of diamonds is not a huge burden on me, since I am in no position to buy diamonds anyway, and I like darker colored stones better anyway as well. Stones that more easily verified provenances. If it comes down to it, and I have a choice between a diamond of questionable history and a garnet of clean history, I'll take the garnet first because of its dark red color and only then because of its history.

Are the people who shop at Wal-mart because they can't afford to shop other places unethical? What about the people who work there?
If you think I'm going to apologize for or backpedal from a statement about MYSELF just because you don't think it applies to other people, you are barking up the wrong tree. As I said to GnI above, I was talking about ME not about humanity in general. I do not shop at Wal-mart because of my ethics. Period. I will be interested to see you find in that statement anything that refers to or is applicable to any other person in the entire world.

The fact is, each person must make their own decisions based on their own ethics. My ethics lead me to not shop at Wal-mart.

And on a purely practical point, I know a lot of people think they can't afford to shop anywhere else, but I have compared stores, and I assure Wal-mart shoppers, they are being ripped off by that company. You can get better deals elsewhere.

I also know that there are places where there are no other jobs, and also no other stores, but Wal-mart, and for those people I feel sorry. That is part of what I blame Wal-mart for.

Other people's failure to think about what they are doing is of no concern to me when it comes to making decisions about what I will do or won't do. I was saying something about myself, not about humanity in general.

And to be entirely honest, my boycott of diamonds is not a huge burden on me, since I am in no position to buy diamonds anyway, and I like darker colored stones better anyway as well. Stones that more easily verified provenances. If it comes down to it, and I have a choice between a diamond of questionable history and a garnet of clean history, I'll take the garnet first because of its dark red color and only then because of its history.


Ah. For me, I prefer 'pretties' like Amber and Pearl over 'gems' anyway. Just odd like that.

But, diamonds were on my list other than for the reason that we all can't stop ourselves rushing out to buy them. Admittedly, I'm making a huge leap of faith, but I think the underlying importance of the OP was to set up a paradigm using specifics, but that can be seen to expand universally.

If it's 'not okay' to buy concentration camp goods... why is it okay to buy slave labour goods. Kind of thing.

I wasn't really discussing your personal responses, I was rather more suggesting that (even if it seems counterintuitive) an actual response to the question could, strangely, be off-topic.

'Opting out' on Wal-Mart doesn't alleviate the circumstances that allow Wal-Mart to do what it does (by the way, I also 'opt-out' on wal-Mart... pretty much for the same reasons you suggested) - and it's the underlying mentality, rather than our personal, individual, responses... that are the heart of the thread.

I think.

Or I'm way off base... I've been wrong before.

(Seven times)

Those kinds of factors that slide by below the consciousness of most of us - which I think is what our friendly ghost was indirectly aiming us at.

Indirectly? That requires literary subtlety. I am the ghost of Pre-eminent Russian American Philosopher Ayn Rand. My work is as carefully textured as the holophoner operas of Phillip J. Fry.

Ah. For me, I prefer 'pretties' like Amber and Pearl over 'gems' anyway. Just odd like that.

But, diamonds were on my list other than for the reason that we all can't stop ourselves rushing out to buy them. Admittedly, I'm making a huge leap of faith, but I think the underlying importance of the OP was to set up a paradigm using specifics, but that can be seen to expand universally.

If it's 'not okay' to buy concentration camp goods... why is it okay to buy slave labour goods. Kind of thing.
Ah, I see. And that is a legitimate question for those who do not think about the ordinary things they do everyday. A lot of people who would never want to buy concentration camp goods, do buy goods made in sweatshops that are little better than forced labor, but it's not because they don't care about abusive working conditions but because they just do not know and never ask themselves, "how was this product made?" They need it, they buy it, they never give it a further thought.

But when people do think about it, then perhaps some of them will reach the conclusion I did, namely:

Question: "If it's 'not okay' to buy concentration camp goods... why is it okay to buy slave labour goods"?

Answer: It is not okay.

But that brings us to the following:

I wasn't really discussing your personal responses, I was rather more suggesting that (even if it seems counterintuitive) an actual response to the question could, strangely, be off-topic.

'Opting out' on Wal-Mart doesn't alleviate the circumstances that allow Wal-Mart to do what it does (by the way, I also 'opt-out' on wal-Mart... pretty much for the same reasons you suggested) - and it's the underlying mentality, rather than our personal, individual, responses... that are the heart of the thread.

I think.

Or I'm way off base... I've been wrong before.

(Seven times)
That's what I was alluding to when I said that I hate it that my politicized shopping choices don't make a dent in abusive international labor systems. The dynamic of sweatshops churning out cheap goods at the expense of human suffering is driven by volume demand. How much of this is due to the thoughtless consumption of affluent societies, and how much of it is due to the volume pressures of an overpopulated world, I do not know. But I find it bitter indeed that I cannot see, at this point in history, a way out of this morass.

Indirectly? That requires literary subtlety. I am the ghost of Pre-eminent Russian American Philosopher Ayn Rand. My work is as carefully textured as the holophoner operas of Phillip J. Fry.

Ah. But are those your own hands?

Ah. But are those your own hands?

No, it´s her robotic ghost writer´s. ,)

"We didn't know" in German. It was something a lot of German citizens answered ...

I think that the Allied did a good thing when they forced the german civilians to visit nearby lagers.
I wish that italian civilians had been forced to become conscious of the fascist atrocities, too (both in Italy and in the colonies).

Yeah. Killing people is probably like getting licked by kittens, in China.

Nya?http://www.smileys.me.uk/smileys/Hello_Kitty/hellokitty04.gif

Nya?http://www.smileys.me.uk/smileys/Hello_Kitty/hellokitty04.gif

Yay! Kitty-chan!

Yay! Kitty-chan!

We'll get that engraved on this:

http://www.jimsgunsupply.com/DuraCoat/dc/AK_HOT_PINK_DuraCoat.jpg

We'll get that engraved on this:

http://www.jimsgunsupply.com/DuraCoat/dc/AK_HOT_PINK_DuraCoat.jpg

That would be totally awesome. Like the Hello Kitty Darth Vader costume.

That would be totally awesome. Like the Hello Kitty Darth Vader costume.

Kitty-chan approves.

Would I buy something made in a concentration camp? Depends on what it is. Messiaen’s “Quartet for the End of Time" was written in a concentration camp and is extremely good music.

So, yeah. Good music, or maybe some kind of creepy Holocaust memento toilet seat? Sure I guess. A sandwich? No.

I wouldn't purchase something I knew was made in a currently-operating concentration camp, unless I had no choice. If the concentration camp were closed and proceeds were being used as a normal business would (with money going to pay what would have been fair wages), I'd buy it.