The joys of sweat--here and abroad

Cluefon
    By Dan Dudis

Sweat has a real image problem. In a battle reminiscent of Truman's effort to contain communism, people all over the world spend billions yearly, trying vainly to control their sweat glands. It would seem that literally millions of sleeveless-dress-clad women have, mid-party, suddenly discovered that the deodorant they had applied pre-party has left a white smudge on their inevitably black dresses. Or so Procter & Gamble would have us believe.

And then, on the other side of the corporate coin that is America, there's Nike. Nike has parlayed the image of sweat chic into big bucks. But American sweat chic comes at a price, argue Nike's critics. Some of these critics are (surprise!) right here on our very campus. Groups like Yale's newly formed Students Against Sweatshops believe that corporations like Nike are using cheap foreign labor to produce their apparel. Nike, the corporation most important in advancing the image of sweat-as-cool, has been accused of (gasp!) running sweatshops in Indonesia.

Now hold your tears, Kathie Lee, and don't cry for me Argentina, because, guess what, sweatshops aren't bad! Nike is not some evil corporate conglomerate engaged in exploitation. Rather, I hold that Nike is a model corporate citizen. My guess is that if anyone actually bothered to ask the Indonesians who work in the "sweatshops," they'd wholeheartedly agree.

But, liberal labor activists aren't interested in asking the Indonesians. They are too busy pursuing their own agenda of latter-day American Imperialism. Cloaked in the unassailable twin guises of fairness and compassion, the liberal labor agenda is really concerned with protecting jobs at home. Labor activists realize that if they stir up enough public ire at corporations like Nike, these companies will move their operations back home, thus creating American jobs in the shrinking domestic apparel industry.

But where does this leave the Indonesians (the people over whom this tempest in a sportsbra was started)? It leaves them without jobs. It leaves them back on the subsistent farms from which they originally emigrated. And in a drought-stricken El Niño year such as this one, it most likely leaves them starving.

Indonesians, like Americans, are rational people. While this may come as a surprise to some meddling labor activists bent on imperialism, anyone who actually bothered to stop for a moment and consider human nature would hardly be shocked. Being a rational person means acting in your best interests. The Indonesians who work in these "sweatshops" chose to work in them of their own accord.

In fact, these jobs were so desired that hundreds of people lined up to apply for every job offered. "Sweatshop" wages, despite being low by American standards, were far higher than what could be made elsewhere; elsewhere usually being the abject poverty of the subsistence farms. The same industries that westerners derided as "sweatshops" were regarded by the Indonesians themselves as heaven-sent.

But if Indonesia instituted a living wage, the workers would be even better off, allege labor activists. Simply not true. If the Indonesian government were to impose a minimum wage above what was being already paid, the "sweatshops" would simply pack up and move to some country without a minimum wage. Such are the ways of the world economy.

As cruel as global capitalism must seem, there is a bright future for developing nations like Indonesia. Look at South Korea. Thirty years ago, South Korea was in a situation similar to Indonesia's today. South Korea embraced the jobs that the world economy sent its way. By doing so, it was able to build its own set of industries that were eventually able to compete on the world stage. Economic development is an incremental process. The industries that are currently attacked as sweatshops are Indonesia's first step towards industria-lizing. To shut them down would be tantamount to killing Indonesians' chances for better futures.

So the next time you're in the Co-op buying Yale apparel, ask that they carry products made in developing nations. Do you want your dollars helping destitute third world workers get a leg up in the world economy, or do you want them to go into the pocket of some well-fed American? The choice is as simple as that. So buy sweatshop! Just do it.

Recent Herald Columns by this Columnist:
NOTE: SITE WILL APPEAR IN A NEW BROWSER WINDOW

• TAC fights subtraction through division, 2/20/98
• Cloning debate spawns greater concern, 2/6/98
• Entitlement Theory Hits Hollywood, 1/16/98

Back to Opinion...