Just Boycott it

The biggest change in our society has been branding. Nike's swoosh seems to be everywhere, however, how many now know of the sweatshops? To say that it was a Nike invention isn't far from the truth: this is how it happened. Nike decided that it no longer wanted anything to do with manufacturing it's sneakers. What they wanted to do was concentrate on the brand, so this aspect was sourced out. It did wonder's for the company's bottom-line. A sneaker during the '90's cost about $5 to make and was selling to consumer's at $120. The people making the shoe got a really raw deal – working for $2.10 a day (that's a 12 hour shift) when three meals a day cost $2.50 (Vietnam.) The people buying it also got a raw deal - $120 for a pair of shoes.... Nike isn't the only company guilty of getting away with these tactics, Apple, Shell, Wal-Mark, Disney. The list is quite long, and they all have the same idea. To make as much profit as possible with no regards to people. To give you a better idea: Nike's turnover in the '90's was 120 times more then Haiti. Fifty-eight of the top 100 GNP are in fact company's and not countries. Our society changed when minority groups – gays, blacks (in the United States) Latino's were targeted with branding. Company's thought that they could get their business if they could create a ad campaign with these groups in mind. That's one of the root causes of main stream thought on gays for example. Before, in the '40's there where in fact gays, but they were all underground, they had 'something' to fight for. Now that its 'overground' it has taken the sting out of it. It's become commercial something that's done because it's fashionable just as a person is not cool if they are not wearing Nike's, Reebok, or eating at McDonalds or buying their goods at Wal-Mark. Pep was caught out buying shirts (the R 9.95 in-store price) for.... R0.48... while I am all for making a profit, I believe that making a fair profit is what this is about. This same outsourcing has happened in Stellenbosch. The University no longer wanted to be bothered with it's catering. A company was subcontracted and the old employee's were at first retained, then the dismissals started happening – the company wasn't making enough to retain all the staff, so recently when Cosatu went on strike the catering people were there – because they had lost jobs/got pay cuts. They weren't there for the reason Cosatu gave – one person was there purely because she backed them. No other reason. The catering people were there because they were under the impression that their cause was the reason for the strike.... Corporate take-over (Nigeria for example, where a leaked memo from the Nigerian Army states 'Shell operations still impossible unless ruthless military operations are undertaken for smooth economic activities... Recommendations: Wasting operations during MOSOP and other gatherings making constant military presence justifiable. Wasting targets cutting across communities and leadership cadres especially vocal individuals of various groups' [http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/ken/opay001.html]) of countries has become a standard these days. We have seen similar things happen in Southern Africa with the 60% purchase of Absa by Barclay's Bank. It has not gone unnoticed that the ANC is in the pockets of the banks – my educated guess is that they financed the 'revolution' during the '80's and '90's (just as Lenin was financed by Chase Manhattan of New York with $5 million in gold bullion.) Corporations at the end of the day, need to know what there place in society is: to add value, to uphold the rule of law, to make a contribution.