babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Of course they are paid less. There is no equity policy outlined in the company fluff piece alluded too by SCC. We know that companies that truly take pride in their progressive street cred publish those, or at least mention them. Source-Military-Vagabond doesnt allude to any thing of the kind, so we know were they stand with that issue. They also make no mention of how they ensure that their "subcontractors" in the West Bank comply with the companies lofty goals, other than to provide hydration equipment for "the heat of battle" as the Source-military web site so elegantly describes it.
Why on earth would a military equipment manufacturer bother outsourcing production into the West Bank if it were not simply to take advantage of the cheap labour rates created by the complete destitution of the people their?
Thing is that SCC has never had a serious job in his life. Straight through school and into academia, so he hasn't heard all that buttery talk about "profit sharing", workplace as "family", and so on, which is all pretty much code for we will fuck you while smiling at you, as anyone who has ever seen the inside of that kind of operation knows. To him it sounds grand.
Prithee tell us Cueball " What is a "serious job"?
I'm a fucking orthopedic surgeon, you idiot. That's not "serious"? What do you do for a living? When you've cut some open while they are under a a general anaesthesia and reconstruct part of their musculoskeletal system, then you can have some credibility in commenting on the "seriousness" of my job.
I went to the military source website right now and they sell fucking BACKPACKS! Not nerve gas Backpacks. Not military grade plutonium. backpacks. Seems the only difference these backpacks adn the "civilian" ones are that these are camoflouge.
I imagine that on an IDF military base (or an American one for that matter), they serve breakfast, maybe some ceral and orange juice. If the orange juice is Tropicana and the cereal is Kellogg, does that make them "military suppliers" because they supply the military with orange juice and cereal? They're not manufacturing tanks and chemical weapons here. We're talking about sandals and backpacks.
And amid your speculation about the "sweat shops" they use in the West Bank (which, presumably would be run be Palestinian sub-contractors) I find it interesting that you omitted the lines that came directly before it. I'll copy them here:
SOURCE is an idealistic company. 10% of our profits are shared among all our workers. 5% of our net profits go to social and environmental activities in the nearby community.
We support the weak and disabled. SOURCE employs deaf workers and we also run a rehabilitation program where mentally disabled people from a nearby hospital work shoulder to shoulder with SOURCE employees.
Any company that would help a soldier drink water is pure evil. PURE. EVIL.
...as said soldiers repress a thirsty population deliberately cut off from their own traditional water supplies by a giant concrete wall? I'd have to agree with you there, Snert.
Funny thing, how the only time you come close to making sense is when you're trying to be sarcastic.
So, LTJ, if these same IDF soldiers also eat Corn Flakes for breakfast (giving them the energy and nutrients they need to go and oppress people who are often lacking food) will you boycott the Kellogg corporation and any store that sells kellogg products? Lets be consistent here.
Will I boycott Kellogg's under such circumstance?
Absolutely. Given the horrendous abuses perpetrated by the Israeli government, I'm in favour of a general boycott of all products from Israel and any companies doing business there at this point.
The insanity has gone on long enough.
As for 'any store selling Kellogg's products', that would certainly be an unreasonable place to start; but were it necessary in the long run I would support such action as well.
Well, I salute your consistency at least. Though I don't know why you would boycott MEC for selling backpacks that do business with the IDF but not, say, Loblaws for selling corn flakes that they presumably eat.
But if you really are committed to boycotting any company that does business with Israel, good luck. Does your computer run on Intel chips? They have a plant in Israel. Do you ever use Google? It's search engine runs on Israeli-designed algorithims. I hope that you or someone you care about never gets diagnosed with diabetes cause a recent breakthrough in treatment for diabetics was made by Israeli researchers at an Israeli university. As for companies that simply "do business" there...um, that's probably jsut about everyone. Do you run Microsoft products? I assume computers in IDF headquarters do as well. Do you drink Coke or Pepsi or wash your clothes with Tide or brush your teeth with Crest or Colgate or shave with a Gilette razor? I'd imagine every one of those companies "does business" with Israel.
Ah. Uh, well... this is kind of awkward, but, um, you realize I'm sarcastically making an over-the-top, buffoonish statement, and you're agreeing with it? As long as you know.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm wondering... if you're a business, are you permitted to say "I'm sorry, but I cannot sell my product to you, because I disagree with your politics"? Is that even legal?
Anyway [reality check] it's friggin' canteens [/reality check].
Great post (#99) SSC.
I think that post is why a number of participants in this thread aren't responding.
They're living their principles, and have dismantled their IDF-complicit computers, and are almost certainly dumping cans of cola down the toilet as we speak. I admire that. I sure hope they can stick to their principles, though. The temptation to use a computer, even knowing that parts of it were made in Israel, must be all but irresistable right now.
I haven't responded because I believe that most of the anti-boycott posters are being disingenuous. It is impossible to debate with someone who makes a caricature of your post based on an invented sentiment balooned to gross hyperbole. It is also impossible to debate with someone who has no interest in discussing the merits of a boycott and instead jumps through Sophist hoops to defend Israel's illegal and criminal occupation of Gaza. I, and others against this criminal act, believe it to be apartheid, but that is a debate for another thread.
Here: a boycott is an activist strategy to place economic pressure on a nation to get that nation or its citizens to change a distateful policy. It is a statement and a tactic. It is not a way of life. It is not a creed meant to make the particpants more morally pure. It is an organized action tailored to produce the desirable result. Therefore, diversionary questions like 'what about this criminal country or that complicit product' are moot and wrongheaded. MEC is a self-defined progressive corporation which makes its membership and board ripe for actioning this particular boycott. Hence the motion put to vote and the attempts by a certain faction of the membership to educate and pressure the rest of the membership. Clearly, the action made the Director of Ethical Sourcing reconsider what 'ethical sourcing' means to MEC (not to Coca-Cola, not to Kellog's: to MEC. Do not dignify these sleight of hands by third-rate tricksters with responses). For the time being, unfortunately, Harvey Chan drew an unjust and incompletre conclusion (do ethics stop at what MEC chooses to define as labour?). But, as LT says, la lutte continue.
Capitalism co-opts everything it touches, and makes us all complicit and culpable in its crimes. Hence complete extraction is impossible. Some choose to use this observation to ridicule any attempt to change this compromising structure, and some choose to ignore honest historical and social analysis of capitalism altogether. That's fine, but this problem and contradiction is not at issue here. The borders to the boycott are clearly drawn: here is what we do not like, here are symbolic and economic participants in what we do not like and here are the people with the influence to change it. Here is one way in which we link the three together to get what we, the people, want.
In short, I reiterate my original salvo to trolls SSC and Snert, with honorary inclusion Ghislaine: Get bent.
So Catchfire, I am assuming that you agree that you will not boycott medical advances made by Israeli researchers at Israeli universities?
And for the record, I have never defended IDF aggression against Palestinians on this board. Quite the contrary. I don't believe in collective punishment for either side. There are religious wackos on both sides who believe that only their religion deserves to live on the so-called Holy Land. This viewpoint goes back thousands of years. There are ordinary people (in my admittedly secular view) trying to live in peace on both sides who believe that they can live and work together. From the statements on their site, this company in question has that goal - in that they would like to work with Palestinian employees and subcontract to Palestinian companies.
An honorary inclusion to Snert and SSC's club? Cool! I did not know they had a club, but what do you say guys (gals?) will you have me?
We're meeting with the Elders of Zion tonight in our secret lair to come up with our latest strategy to control the banks and the media.
Catchfire's first three paragraphes are a very good discussion of boycotts. I wish he had have left out the last pargraph. of course, that is where the focus will go.
I had a friend in the IS who was fond of saying " you can't opt out of capitalism."
Uh, Catchfire, were you HACKED yesterday or something? Because as I recall, it was actually YOUR post that I believed made a lot of sense:
But now you don't seem to support your own suggestion. Someone didn't shame you, did they?
Ghislaine: welcome aboard! There are no dues, there's no charter, and our only dogma is "No Dogmas Allowed".
Getting long...