> I don't think it's "whataboutism" to point out that we're comfortable buying goods made with child labour so long as they're from another country
We very much are not.
Both the USA and especially the EU have stringent laws against importing goods produced using child labour. Companies put some serious efforts auditing their suppliers to ensure no child labour is used and every time they fail it becomes a major scandal (see Nike as an exemple).
Actually the reason you know Foxconn employed 14 years old is because it was a major violation of child labour law and was widely reported as such. The Chinese state wasn’t happy about that at all. I can assure they didn’t go back to the production lines.
If you're trying to paint a picture of justice and the rule of law
working all according to plan, I don't buy it.
IIRC it was an undercover documentary I watched. Not sure who the team
who made it were, and cannot find it on YouTube etc now. But I do not
recall it being a labour audit team from Apple or Amazon. Both of whom
I remember initially denied the claims, and then distanced themselves
from Foxconn (while the story blew-over) before eventually admitting
it much later [1]
Of course we all know how such inconveniences are spun: it was an
"isolated" incident. A few bad apples. Mistakes were made. The
(scapegoat) managers have been fired. Lessons learned... etc.
> I can assure they didn’t go back to the production lines.
On what basis do you make such "assurances"? Because I'm pretty sure
you are wrong. For me, a most stomach churning aspect of that whole
story was the "soft torture" of the poor kids who were not even able
to end their ordeal by suicide. The anti-suicide nets were the
company's response instead of changing the awful working conditions.
Quite beyond belief.
They were designed to catch the workers, who could then be given
"counselling" (presumably advice on what would happen to their families
if they tried that again) and then returned to work as soon as
possible.
> If you're trying to paint a picture of justice and the rule of law working all according to plan, I don't buy it.
Your original statement was that we, the collective west, are confortable buying the product of child labour as long as it happens abroad. This is clearly false. Not only are we uncomfortable doing so, we find the idea so abhorrent that we have made it illegal.
> On what basis do you make such "assurances"?
The CCP doesn’t take people flaunting Chinese laws kindly.
Also while the issue with underage interns was discovered during the probe on the suicides, they are unrelated events. The workers who killed themselves due to overworking and poor working conditions were all of legal age.
Under age workers were provided as month long interns from vocational schools. Foxconn wasn’t checking if they were of legal ages which made quite a splash.
> Your original statement was that we, the collective west, are
confortable buying the product of child labour as long as it happens
abroad. This is clearly false.
I don't think it is "clearly false". And you've offered me no contrary
evidence - although I cannot imagine what that would realistically be
or that we can resolve this difference of opinion by appealing to the
stated opinions of other groups.
But "we" in this case is undefined.
There is the "we" of PR executives, corporate lawyers and politicians,
all of whom paint a party line on how "we are uncomfortable"
And then there are the tens of millions of people who, knowing the
reality of overseas child labour (through, as you say yourself, the
widely reported news), still go out and buy an iPhone or Amazon Alexa.
As far as I know neither Apple nor Amazon's sales were significantly
hit by these revelations.
There is a vast difference between the world as we wish it to be, and
the world as it really is. I think you speak more to the former.
> I don't think it is "clearly false". And you've offered me no contrary evidence
Obviously I have. First I have pointed to you that it is illegal. Secondly I have mentioned Nike to you. After the 1996 Life magazine report and the subsequent protest, they lost millions of dollars of sales and had to work on the issue significantly in the following years to save their image.
You keep torpedoing your own argument yourself anyway by bringing up all the articles covering the issue which should show you people care.
This conversation is over as far as I’m concerned. I’m impressed by the length you are ready to go to refuse to simply admit you are wrong.
> This conversation is over as far as I’m concerned.
Well thank goodness for that. You've offered nothing of any value
except reiterating your own disagreement and sidestepped everything
I've offered you with wilful ignorance. I get it, you don't like what
I'm saying, but your arguments are pitiable. A most disappointing
exchange.
We very much are not.
Both the USA and especially the EU have stringent laws against importing goods produced using child labour. Companies put some serious efforts auditing their suppliers to ensure no child labour is used and every time they fail it becomes a major scandal (see Nike as an exemple).
Actually the reason you know Foxconn employed 14 years old is because it was a major violation of child labour law and was widely reported as such. The Chinese state wasn’t happy about that at all. I can assure they didn’t go back to the production lines.