Goddess On A Hiway - Mercury Rev
A Wikileaks post published on The Nation shows that the Obama Administration fought to keep Haitian wages at 31 cents an hour.
Contractors for Fruit of the Loom, Hanes and Levi’s worked in close concert with the US Embassy when they aggressively moved to block a minimum wage increase for Haitian assembly zone workers, the lowest-paid in the hemisphere, according to secret State Department cables.
It started when Haiti passed a law two years ago raising its minimum wage to 61 cents an hour. According to an embassy cable:
This infuriated American corporations like Hanes and Levi Strauss that pay Haitians slave wages to sew their clothes. They said they would only fork over a seven-cent-an-hour increase, and they got the State Department involved. The U.S. ambassador put pressure on Haiti’s president, who duly carved out a $3 a day minimum wage for textile companies (the U.S. minimum wage, which itself is very low, works out to $58 a day).
Haiti has about 25,000 garment workers. If you paid each of them $2 a day more, it would cost their employers $50,000 per working day, or about $12.5 million a year … As of last year Hanes had 3,200 Haitians making t-shirts for it. Paying each of them two bucks a day more would cost it about $1.6 million a year. Hanesbrands Incorporated made $211 million on $4.3 billion in sales last year.
Thanks to U.S. intervention, the minimum was raised only to 31 cents.
The revelation of US support for low wages in Haiti’s assembly zones was in a trove of 1,918 cables made available to the Haitian weekly newspaper Haïti Liberté by the transparency group WikiLeaks. As part of a collaboration with Haïti Liberté, The Nation is publishing English-language articles based on those cables.
Marxists make the compelling point that corporate capitalism creates a highly seductive and sexualized world in which impulse reigns. Accordingly, a new personality type steps forward: hedonistic, expressive, impulsive, and highly sexualized.
Corporate capitalism promotes a culture that values sexual pleasure. Sexuality is now often viewed as a natural and positive basis of self-fulfillment. The conventional wisdom is that too much self-control produces psychological and social problems. To most Marxists, however, this pleasure-oriented sexual culture does not promote real sexual freedom. A culture that celebrates a superficial drive for pleasure leads not to fulfillment but to an aimless, unhappy search for gratification. Moreover, sexuality focused on technique and performance comes to resemble work; accordingly, it loses much of its tender, intimate, and caring qualities. Finally, Marxists argue that as we search for personal happiness, the gross inequalities between the rich and poor go unchallenged. There can be no real sexual freedom until there is real individual freedom, which is impossible under capitalism.
Marxists argue, then, that a consumer-oriented economy has decisively shaped contemporary patterns of sexuality. Consumer capitalism promotes a view of sex as natural, brings sex into the public arena, creates new sex industries [porn, sex toys, phone sex], and champions sexual choice and pleasure. A capitalist sexual culture promotes tolerance, but it wants to make sex more open and acceptable solely so that sex can be used to sell goods, to attach the individual to consumerism, and to turn people’s attention to personal fulfillment rather than class inequality and political action.”
i hate when ppl say “consumerism” as a euphemism for the problem when what they mean is “capitalism” like shhh its ok just say it. capitalism is the problem. u can say it
it’s not even euphemistic! it places the blame for capitalism on those of us who have to engage in it to survive, i.e. the victims of capitalism as a system of oppression, i.e. the working classes, rather than placing the blame on the people creating or at least benefiting from the problem, i.e. the capitalist class
"In fairness, it’s hard to imagine an alternative to the capitalist mode of production, especially when we’re all so caught up in it all the time. So we thought we’d put it to you: Can you think of one? How would it work?"