From jhminshall at comcast.net Sat May 1 17:08:47 2004 From: jhminshall at comcast.net (Janet Minshall) Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 17:08:47 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Fwd: misrepresentations, innuendos and errors on sweatshops, globalization and economics in Friends Journal article In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20040429075620.00b74bc0@mail.read-the-bible.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20040429075620.00b74bc0@mail.read-the-bible.org> Message-ID: Dear Susan Jeffers, Thanks for your response. I think Jack partially answered your question in his article. He worked in the countries he writes about over many years. He didn't just read about what existed, take a guided tour or quote others to make his case about conditions in "lands far away". In the pieces I have posted on the SAYMA list I have talked about my economic development efforts, supported by monthly meetings and yearly meetings all over the country, in East Africa. I visited textiles factories in Nairobi and a paper mill near Lugulu. These would, I think, all be considered "sweatshops" by those who wish to try to end outsourcing of US processing and manufacturing to other countries. I have also traveled extensively in Europe, the Middle East and briefly in Eastern Europe, Mexico and in Central America. I agree with you about the shortcomings of tours where people are guided and accompanied by a person or persons who are "selling" a particular political position. I understand that some labor unions and others who support them sponsor such tours of so-called "sweatshops". I won't attempt to answer for Jack, although I have forwarded your response on to him. I have said repeatedly on the SAYMA list, however, that slavery and the traffic in women and children for prostitution do certainly exist and are most reprehensible. The dishonesty I see, however, is that when so-called "sweatshops" and the issue of outsourcing are mentioned they are often equated with slavery and the traffic in women and children for prostitution. So-called "Sweatshops" are simply the places where people work in the rest of the world. Sometimes they are electrified and have plumbing, sometimes not. Often they have fans and adequate natural lighting. They are not, to my knowledge, air-conditioned and in many parts of the world (like Atlanta) there are times when the conditions are hot and sticky without air conditioning. If visitors are brought to visit at such times, the working conditions are hot and sticky. Most people, the vast majority in my experience, who work in so-called "sweatshops" or for companies under outsourcing contracts with US corporations do not run the risk of being taken in slavery or being kidnapped for purposes of prostitution. It is a false connection which has been made in order to try to keep the good, high-paying jobs in the US for relatively affluent US-born workers rather than sending them out into the rest of the world to be filled by people who are usually considerably poorer than either workers or the unemployed in the US. The fact that you found site after site on chocolate slaves while using Google simply confirms that slavery exists and that there are many, many good people trying to end it. It has no relevance whatsoever to the focus of Jack's article (see Subject above). Jack and I are both Friends. We both take the Gospel-based testimonies of Quakers seriously. If you wish to look for publications which proclaim differing opinions and points of view I'm sure you can find them. Janet Minshall >Thanks to Janet Minshall for forwarding Jack Powelson's article, >submitted to Friends Journal. > >I have a long-standing question for Friends (including myself) >"eager to be of assistance to the less fortunate" and trying to "act >in light of actual circumstances of various situations in order to >offer real, long-term solutions." > >My question is -- how do we "know" what we "know" about "actual >circumstances" in lands far away, involving people we've met only >through highly developed mediated sources such as organizational >websites, magazine articles, and even study tours/delegations (which >are, in the nature of the thing, themselves well-scripted). > >Jack Powelson criticizes David Morse's piece, writing "I know of no >slave-worked chocolate plantations. These jobs are taken by free >choice, meaning that the alternative (in the eyes of the workers) is >worse." > >I just went on Google and typed in "chocolate slave" and got site >after site with photos and interviews and of course plenty of >exhortation about the evils of African children being kidnapped >and/or sold into slavery to work the cocoa plantations. Who's to >know what's real? and how can we know? > >Many of us just choose whichever news media we deem "trustworthy" >and take their word for it; I have a hard time doing that, myself... >I always feel the urge to go see for myself somehow, and if I can't >then I just reserve judgment. I seem to have plenty of problems to >work on that are right under my nose, in any case... > >Any thoughts? > >Grace and peace to you all -- > >Susan Jeffers > >----------------------------------------------- >EMail: susan at read-the-bible.org >Peace Church Bible Study Home Page: www.read-the-bible.org > >_______________________________________________ >Southern Appalachian Yearly Meeting and Association mailing list >posting address: sayma at kitenet.net >subscribe/unsubscribe: http://kitenet.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sayma From jhminshall at comcast.net Sat May 1 17:22:26 2004 From: jhminshall at comcast.net (Janet Minshall) Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 17:22:26 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Jack Powelson's article as submitted to Friends Journal Message-ID: Dear Friends, Please consider the draft and the final submission of Jack Powelson's article sent to Friends Journal in response to David Morse's article hereby deleted or retracted or whatever the appropriate term is for removing it from this site. Any future discussion of it will be responded to off line. Thanks, Janet Minshall From bright_crow at mindspring.com Tue May 4 22:00:34 2004 From: bright_crow at mindspring.com (Michael Austin Shell) Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 22:00:34 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] May Update to SEYMpeace.org Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20040504220002.009e8d80@pop.mindspring.com> Friends, Please take a look at the new webpage: http://seympeace.org/ Thanks, Mike. From debra at debrasjohnson.net Wed May 5 17:45:18 2004 From: debra at debrasjohnson.net (debra at debrasjohnson.net) Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 17:45:18 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] The draft Message-ID: <146040-22004535214518155@M2W038.mail2web.com> Friends, I don't think we should let this slip up on us. While most military experts state that bringing back the draft will not solve the short-term problems of troop levels in Iraq, it could give the administration an opening in the "fight on terrorism." http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/171522_draft01.html Salaam, Debra -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From MBIvie at comcast.net Thu May 6 13:13:47 2004 From: MBIvie at comcast.net (Missy Ivie) Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 13:13:47 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] SAYMA REGISTRATION!!! Message-ID: <00b101c4338d$7eaf27b0$c67ba8c0@MissyDellPC> As one of the co-registrars will not be able to be at SAYMA this year, there will be only two co-registrars and not three people at the Registration Desk. If you can make it to SAYMA by Thursday, PLEASE VOLUNTEER!!! Thanks Missy Ivie From freepolazzo at comcast.net Fri May 7 08:34:56 2004 From: freepolazzo at comcast.net (free polazzo) Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 08:34:56 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Why Mother's Day was started: 'In the Name of Womanhood and Humanity...' Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040507082929.02b99f50@mail.comcast.net> >Dear Friends, What is now widely viewed as a sentimental tribute to family -- Mother's Day -- was originally a call for women to wage a general strike to end war. by Geov Parrish, WorkingForChange.com Posted on May 6, 2004. Please take the time to read that attached article which explains the history of Mother's Day and how it was originally implemented to wage a general strike to end war. >This story has been forwarded to you from http://www.alternet.org by >freepolazzo at comcast.net. > > > >------------------------------------- >'In the Name of Womanhood and Humanity...' >http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18623 Free "The greatest ally of injustice is silence" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From freepolazzo at comcast.net Fri May 7 08:34:56 2004 From: freepolazzo at comcast.net (free polazzo) Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 08:34:56 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Why Mother's Day was started: 'In the Name of Womanhood and Humanity...' Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040507082929.02b99f50@mail.comcast.net> >Dear Friends, What is now widely viewed as a sentimental tribute to family -- Mother's Day -- was originally a call for women to wage a general strike to end war. by Geov Parrish, WorkingForChange.com Posted on May 6, 2004. Please take the time to read that attached article which explains the history of Mother's Day and how it was originally implemented to wage a general strike to end war. >This story has been forwarded to you from http://www.alternet.org by >freepolazzo at comcast.net. > > > >------------------------------------- >'In the Name of Womanhood and Humanity...' >http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18623 Free "The greatest ally of injustice is silence" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From earthsteward at urisp.net Fri May 7 10:00:43 2004 From: earthsteward at urisp.net (Daryl Bergquist) Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 09:00:43 -0500 Subject: [saymaListserv] Why Mother's Day was started: 'In the Name of Womanhood and Humanity...' In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.2.20040507082929.02b99f50@mail.comcast.net> References: <6.0.3.0.2.20040507082929.02b99f50@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <409B968B.2090509@urisp.net> Free's posting on Mothers Day brings to mind the picture on the back cover of May issue of Readers Digest. It is a painting of a US soldier, presumedly in Iraq, with machine gun across her lap receiving a Mothers Day card from home. Mothers are fighting this war! Very powerful picture. Judith from our worship group brought a poster of it to our mothly Prayer Vigil for Peace held on the steps of the Blount County courthouse. Daryl Bergquist, Royal Worship Group free polazzo wrote: >> Dear Friends, > > > What is now widely viewed as a sentimental tribute to family -- > Mother's Day -- was originally a call for women to wage a general > strike to end war. by Geov Parrish, WorkingForChange.com Posted on > May 6, 2004. > > Please take the time to read that attached article which explains the > history of Mother's Day and how it was originally implemented to wage > a general strike to end war. > > >> This story has been forwarded to you from http://www.alternet.org >> by freepolazzo at comcast.net. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------- >> 'In the Name of Womanhood and Humanity...' >> http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18623 > > Free > > "The greatest ally of injustice is silence" > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Southern Appalachian Yearly Meeting and Association mailing list >posting address: sayma at kitenet.net >subscribe/unsubscribe: http://kitenet.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sayma > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bright_crow at mindspring.com Wed May 12 12:01:31 2004 From: bright_crow at mindspring.com (Mike Shell) Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 12:01:31 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [saymaListserv] Fw: Who Should Have the Right to Marry? Join the AFSC Peace Building Dialogues! Message-ID: <10619727.1084377691719.JavaMail.root@wamui10.slb.atl.earthlink.net> Friends, Please take a look at this new AFSC project. Thanks, Mike. -----Forwarded Message----- From: Kay Whitlock Sent: May 11, 2004 1:18 PM To: Michael Austin Shell Subject: Who Should Have the Right to Marry? Join the AFSC Peace Building Dialogues! Who Should Have the Right to Marry? A New Faith-based Online Dialogue, Starting the Week of May 17 Please forward this message to friends, family, colleagues, and others on your listservs who might want to participate - those who share your perspective, and especially those who don't! The American Friends Service Committee, putting Quaker values into action, invites you to join an online discussion about religion, law, and marriage rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Is marriage a matter of faith or a matter of law? Would a constitutional amendment defining marriage affect your own religious freedom in any way? Have you talked about this issue in your own faith or spiritual community? In our Peace Building Dialogues, ordinary people can add their voices to a discussion that has been dominated by the dynamics of polarization and sound-bite politics. This two-week dialogue will begin the week of May 17. Register now or learn more at: http://build-peace.weblab.org. Through these online dialogues, we hope people from many different faith and spiritual traditions can find ways to acknowledge our differences, affirm our commonly-held values, and continue to engage each other with respect and love. Faithfully, Kay Whitlock Community Relations Unit American Friends Service Committee kwhitlock at afsc.org You've received this invitation because a friend or colleague suggested we send it to you. Neither The American Friends Service Committee nor the Peace Building Dialogues will contact you again regarding these dialogues. AFSC will not sell or rent your email address to third parties. From debra at debrasjohnson.net Wed May 12 12:49:40 2004 From: debra at debrasjohnson.net (debra at debrasjohnson.net) Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 12:49:40 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Help spread the word about the Peace Building Dialogues Message-ID: <244640-220045312164940216@M2W045.mail2web.com> From: Tony Heriza Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 1:14 PM To: BULLETIN--AFSC Subject: Help spread the word about the Peace Building Dialogues Dear colleagues, We are proud to announce that AFSC is launching a new campaign, Peace Building in a Time of Cultural War: * to reject the call to "cultural war" over LGBT rights and recognition, especially in faith-based communities, and * to bring a new, prophetic, and non-polarizing spiritual voice to the "marriage debates." You can see more at: http://build-peace.org The campaign will begin by sponsoring a groundbreaking online project - the Peace Building Dialogues (http://build-peace.weblab.org) - in collaboration with the New York City firm Web Lab. Starting the week of May 17, these dialogues will engage hundreds of people of faith nationwide in a respectful, spiritually-based conversation about the issues of love, marriage, faith and law. We need your help to reach a diverse group of participants. We are looking to invite people from all faith and spiritual communities with a wide range of opinions on this issue. Please take a moment today to send the invitation (attached and below) to all your contacts who might be interested in this interfaith exchange. (A document with talking points on the campaign and related issues is also attached to help you understand and discuss the campaign and the dialogues.) Thanks in advance for your help. Tony Heriza Communications Department Kay Whitlock Community Relations Unit ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- Sample invitation (please add a short personal line of your own at the top) Email Subject Line: Who should have the right to marry? Join the AFSC Peace Building Dialogues Who Should Have the Right to Marry? A New Faith-based Dialogue Online (starting the Week of May 17) Please forward this message to friends, family, colleagues, and others on your listservs who might want to participate - those who share your perspective, and especially those who don't! The American Friends Service Committee, putting Quaker values into action, invites you to join an online discussion about religion, law, and marriage rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Is marriage a matter of faith or a matter of law? Would a constitutional amendment defining marriage affect your own religious freedom in any way? Have you talked about this issue in your own faith or spiritual community? In our Peace Building Dialogues, ordinary people can add their voices to a discussion that has been dominated by the dynamics of polarization and sound-bite politics. This two-week dialogue will begin the week of May 17. Register now or learn more at: http://build-peace.weblab.org. Through these online dialogues, we hope people from many different faith and spiritual traditions can find ways to acknowledge our differences, affirm our commonly-held values, and continue to engage each other with respect and love. Faithfully, Kay Whitlock Community Relations Unit American Friends Service Committee kwhitlock at afsc.org You've received this invitation because a friend or colleague suggested we send it to you. Neither The American Friends Service Committee nor the Peace Building Dialogues will contact you again regarding these dialogues. AFSC will not sell or rent your email address to third parties. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From jhminshall at comcast.net Wed May 12 18:35:34 2004 From: jhminshall at comcast.net (Janet Minshall) Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 18:35:34 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Fwd: A Lesson on Outsourcing Message-ID: Another timely message from Friend Tom Coyner of Seoul Monthly Meeting in South Korea. This one you might enjoy. Janet Minshall >X-Sender: aci_worldwide at mail.gabia.co.kr >Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 09:41:10 +0900 >To: coyner at gol.com >From: Tom Coyner >Subject: A Lesson on Outsourcing > >A Lesson on Outsourcing >Dave Barry > >Before we get to today's column, I have an important announcement regarding >outsourcing. > >"Outsourcing" is a business expression that means, in layperson's terms, >"sourcing out." It's a trend that started years ago in manufacturing, which >is a business term that means "making things." > >You youngsters won't believe this, but there was a time when Americans >actually made physical things called "products" right here in America. >Workers would go to large grimy buildings called "factories" where they >would take a raw material such as iron ore and perform industrial acts on >it, such as "forging" and "smelting." By the end of the day, as you can >imagine, they smelt terrible (rim shot), but they had turned the ore into >something useful, such as a locomotive, or a toaster, or (this was not a big >seller) a toaster-locomotive. > >Today, of course, we don't make anything. If you give iron ore to modern >American workers, it will get into their Starbucks mocha latte, and they >will sue you, and they will win. The making of things was outsourced decades >ago to foreign nations such as Asia. Today, we Americans are dimly aware >that our TVs, computers, cell phones, underwear, dentures, cartoons, etc., >must come from SOMEWHERE but we have no real clue who is making them, or >how. We have enough trouble figuring out how to remove the packaging. After >we stopped making things, America became a "service economy," which is a >business term meaning "an economy where it is virtually impossible to get >service." But now even our service industries are being outsourced. Take, >for example, "Technical Support," which is the department you call when you >are having a technical problem and need to be placed on hold. Today, when >you finally get through to a human, he or she is often in a different >country. This is good news and bad news: > >THE GOOD NEWS IS: The foreign Tech Support people are smart, educated, and >eager to help, and they speak fluent English. > >THE BAD NEWS IS: They speak it in such a way that you understand only about >every fifth word. > >I recently had a problem with a computer, so I called Technical Support, >which in the case of this company is located, I believe, on Mars, and >although the person on the other end sincerely tried to help, the only word >I consistently understood him saying was "David." I felt like the dog in the >Far Side cartoon who's getting a stern lecture from his master, but the only >thing the dog understands is his own name: > >TECH SUPPORT GUY: David, wokm todelc strsprot, David. Cnygv meth serilnbr? > >ME: The serial number? You want the serial Number? > >TECH SUPPORT GUY: Thtsrdy ndimsng, David. Logndr tit, David? > >ME: What? > >TECH SUPPORT GUY: Sit, David! Lie down! > >But we might as well accept it: Outsourcing is here to stay. And it's >happening EVERYWHERE, including industries that would surprise you: > >¥ When you order a hamburger at a McDonald's drive-thru, the person who's >taking your order is actually located in the Philippines. Your hamburger is >physically cooked by workers in China, then transmitted almost >instantaneously to the US via a high-speed Digitized Beef Patty Line (DBPL). >All of this happens in less time than takes you to pick your nose. (And soon >even THAT will be outsourced.) > >¥ When you take a commercial airline flight, the plane is actually being >controlled from India by a 10-year-old girl holding a remote-control >joystick in one hand and a lollipop in the other. The "pilot" in the front >of your plane is a retired security guard whose sole responsibility is to >notice when the plane starts shaking, and make an announcement that you are >experiencing turbulence. > >¥ When you go to the hospital for surgery, after the anesthesiologist puts >you out, your body is ... OK, you don't want to know. > >The point is that EVERYTHING is being outsourced. In a few years, the only >industry left in the United States will be "reality" television. A lot of >people think this is bad. Congress recently tried to pass a law against >outsourcing, only to discover that all federal legislation since 1997 has >actually been produced in Taiwan. > >So outsourcing is here to stay. Which leads me to my announcement: Starting >today, I will no longer personally write my column. It will be produced by >foreign humor workers, who, rest assured, are highly trained. You will >notice no dropoff in quality as you continue to enjoy the wacky hmogrins of >fblsevry lftht hvfrsmnyrs aqdrfltns abtfbls not making this up rltngn >alrtrds a good name for a rock band. > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > KOREA ECONOMIC READER > A free subscription service by Tom Coyner > Email: coyner at gol.com > Home Tel: 82-2-764-8387; Fax: 82-2-747-7653 > Work Tel: 82-2-2198-2230 Mobile: 82-11-9099-6195 > Home Web: http://www2.gol.com/users/coynerhm >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Should you wish off of the distribution list, please send a > simple "unsubscribe" message; if you wish others to receive > this clipping service, please offer their email addresses. >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From losborne at cn.edu Mon May 17 13:21:47 2004 From: losborne at cn.edu (Larry Osborne) Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:21:47 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization Message-ID: RE: Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization Friend Janet's contributions have been helpful in calling into question mean-spirited, uninformed, and broad-brush criticism of outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization. I sense also a personal hurt among some business persons and professional experts who feel their ethics and integrity have been impugned and their experience negated by activists within the anti-sweatshop and anti-globalization movement, especially when the activists are Friends and express themselves through Friends' publications, groups, and Meetings. Although as a relatively new Quaker I have not experienced a lot of blanket negativity about business per se, I have heard and in fact share many of the negative pre-conceptions about outsourcing, sweatshops, and globalization that Janet has addressed-that they often involve the exploitation of poor workers, especially women and children; that they often result in environmental degradation; that they directly contribute to rising unemployment, declining standards of living, and community decay in the United States. Based on the information she has provided, I am prepared to accept Janet's points that most sweatshops do not involve slavery, that most probably are consistent with the norms of the host country and culture within which they exist, and that given the way things work, there are real benefits to this type of community and economic development. Why do I continue to hold predominately negative views about outsourcing, sweatshops, and globalization? I have read a fair amount of information on the topics from sources such as Friends' Journal, The Other Side, and Sojourners. I am familiar with a number of social justice organizations and activists in my area such as the Highlander Center and the Tennessee Industrial Renewal Network, who oppose these trends. I also tend to think the way I do from growing up in a textile town in South Carolina that, thanks to free trade, is turning into a ghost town with personal loan and check-cashing services as the local growth industry. On visits home over recent years, I have seen the mills close and leave as they follow cheap wages and the absence of environmental and occupational health regulations to other countries. My Mother-in-Law, hoping to work until full retirement age, was recently laid off from her job in a North Carolina textile mill under similar circumstances. Likewise in Southern Appalachia, where I have lived for the past 25 years, so many different industries have closed I have lost count. One of my friends, an African American man in his mid-50's and native of my county, has been laid off for over a month now from the TV cabinet and assembly plant he has worked at for over 15 years. His future work opportunities are uncertain at best. I resist framing the debate about outsourcing, sweatshops, and globalization as who needs the jobs the most. I do not believe this pattern of economic development is an ideal or justifiable way of addressing poverty in the developing world, although I realize the people receiving the jobs do benefit from having them in the sense that even low wage work under difficult conditions is preferable to no wage work and starvation. Indisputably, their poverty is more desperate and destructive than what I see the this country. However, there are other ways to think about and approach community and economic development, and that is what I believe Friends' organizations and publications are trying to help us do. I am not in sympathy with the intimation that professional experts supportive of "good" outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization should exercise editorial control and decision-making about what Friends' Journal should publish. I would like to see articles and letters to the editor by such persons as well as other sources of information that represent the "pro" side of this debate. I also would like to see us discuss these matters without impugning the ethics, integrity, motives, and knowledge of those with whom we disagree. In particular I would like to recognize the deep caring for others and commitment to reducing the violence of poverty that motivate persons who acknowledge benefits to outsourcing, sweatshops, and globalization. Our debate is about strategy, not who cares and who doesn't. I am attaching below a relatively brief list of organizations of which I am aware that fight sweatshops and globalization and promote alternative, just and sustainable development. If there are problems with these groups or organizations, I would be extremely interested in the details. Larry Osborne West Knoxville Friends Meeting A. Some organizations critical of the exploitative aspects of sweatshops and globalization: * Sweat Free Communities: http://www.behindthelabel.org/campaigns/sfc/ * Sweatshop Watch: http://www.sweatshopwatch.org/ * Co-op America's Guide to Ending Sweatshops and Promoting Fair Trade: http://www.sweatshops.org/ B. Some organizations that promote just and sustainable community and economic development: * Business for Social Responsibility: http://www.bsr.org/ * Business Ethics Magazine 100 Best Corporate Citizens: http://www.business-ethics.com/100best.htm * The Calvert Social Index-a broad-based, rigorously constructed benchmark for measuring the performance of large, US-based socially responsible companies: http://www.calvertgroup.com/sri_calvertindex.asp * The Conscious Consumer Project of the Center for the New American Dream: http://www.newdream.org/consumer/index.shtml -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhminshall at comcast.net Mon May 17 21:11:26 2004 From: jhminshall at comcast.net (Janet Minshall) Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 21:11:26 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Larry Osborne, I appreciate your well-thought-out response. My intention is not necessarily to change the minds of others in SAYMA, but rather to make room for discussion and information which is not consistent with "what everyone knows". Actually, the process of globalization has been going on for a very long time. The pace of globalization was even faster in the early part of the 20th century than it is now. Outsourcing, too has been happening for a long time. It is only now, however, that many are noticing. My spouse's father went bankrupt in New York City when the textile mills there began to close down and reopen in the South in order to take advantage of cheaper labor. In New York as well as in New England at the time there was rising unemployment, declining standards of living and community decay while the South began to industrialize and slowly to grow and prosper. What happened in New York was that new, more technologically advanced industries developed and eventually filled the gaps left by the loss of the textile mills to the South. Many a Yankee close to the textile industry at the time complained about the exploitation of poor Southern workers and spoke of "protecting" them from the evils of economic development just as anti-globalization folks now speak of "protecting" the poor in Less Developed Countries from the evils of economic development. Why is it that Friends Journal tends to publish articles which are full of misinformation on economics, globalization and capitalism? It may be because most of the people who write for Friends Journal are Friends. It probably has something to do with the fact that Early Friends were business people (who, as the old saw goes, came to the New World to do good and did very well indeed) while current Friends tend overwhelmingly to be teachers, social workers, therapists, academicians, etc who never actually learned about economics. Much of economics is counter-intuitive but, nonetheless, true. Popular and well-loved Quaker Economist, Kenneth Boulding is said to have commented in discussion at Boulder Monthly Meeting that "Quakers don't know anything about economics, and what they do know is wrong." It is your very concern about deep caring for others and reducing the violence of poverty which is being expressed by many who have actually lived and worked in Less Develped Countries and seen the miraculous changes which come about from economic development. Simply having a job can dramatically change consciousness and promote commmunal concern. It is that reality which escapes many Friends and Friends'organizations. It really is that simple. You didn't mention the demonization and name-calling which occurs among Friends in regard to corporations and businesses. Their ethics, integrity and motives are regularly impugned with no apparent eldering coming from those among us who should take that responsibility. Corporations and businesses are made up of and run by human beings. Human beings have the faults and frailties common to the species. But corporations hire and employ more people in the world than any other sort of entity. If jobs are indeed the key to massively reducing poverty and misery in the world as many economists are saying, and if simply having jobs, having a source of income, raises consciousness about the environment, about human rights and about ALL of our other concerns for social justice, then we need to work with, not against, businesses and corporations which provide those jobs. And we need to become activist shareholders in those corporations to help influence the way they function. And we need to be sure that the boards and officers of those corporations ally with and function in our interests. Please add one more name and web site to your list. Rather than being an organization made up of Friends trying to solve economic problems without understanding economics, it is made up of people in business and working for corporations acting on many of the concerns of Friends, though they do vote to come to decisions, I think. The group is Net Impact. (You won't get anywhere with them if you start out calling them names and accusing them of all the ethical and human rights violations you think they must be part of.) There are also coalitions of businesses and corporations specifically working on reducing greenhouse emissions as well as cleaning up the seas, rivers and lakes of the world. If you surf the net you'll find them. Janet Minshall NET IMPACT 111 Sutter Street, 12th Floor San Francisco, California 94104 phone: 415-984-3300 FAX:415-084-3301 mail at net-impact.org >RE: Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization > >Friend Janet's contributions have been helpful in calling into >question mean-spirited, uninformed, and broad-brush criticism of >outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization. I sense also a >personal hurt among some business persons and professional experts >who feel their ethics and integrity have been impugned and their >experience negated by activists within the anti-sweatshop and >anti-globalization movement, especially when the activists are >Friends and express themselves through Friends' publications, >groups, and Meetings. > > Although as a relatively new Quaker I have not experienced a lot of >blanket negativity about business per se, I have heard and in fact >share many of the negative pre-conceptions about outsourcing, >sweatshops, and globalization that Janet has addressed-that they >often involve the exploitation of poor workers, especially women and >children; that they often result in environmental degradation; that >they directly contribute to rising unemployment, declining standards >of living, and community decay in the United States. > >Based on the information she has provided, I am prepared to accept >Janet's points that most sweatshops do not involve slavery, that >most probably are consistent with the norms of the host country and >culture within which they exist, and that given the way things work, >there are real benefits to this type of community and economic >development. > >Why do I continue to hold predominately negative views about >outsourcing, sweatshops, and globalization? I have read a fair >amount of information on the topics from sources such as Friends' >Journal, The Other Side, and Sojourners. I am familiar with a >number of social justice organizations and activists in my area such >as the Highlander Center and the Tennessee Industrial Renewal >Network, who oppose these trends. I also tend to think the way I do >from growing up in a textile town in South Carolina that, thanks to >free trade, is turning into a ghost town with personal loan and >check-cashing services as the local growth industry. On visits home >over recent years, I have seen the mills close and leave as they >follow cheap wages and the absence of environmental and occupational >health regulations to other countries. My Mother-in-Law, hoping to >work until full retirement age, was recently laid off from her job >in a North Carolina textile mill under similar circumstances. >Likewise in Southern Appalachia, where I have lived for the past 25 >years, so many different industries have closed I have lost count. >One of my friends, an African American man in his mid-50's and >native of my county, has been laid off for over a month now from the >TV cabinet and assembly plant he has worked at for over 15 years. >His future work opportunities are uncertain at best. > >I resist framing the debate about outsourcing, sweatshops, and >globalization as who needs the jobs the most. I do not believe this >pattern of economic development is an ideal or justifiable way of >addressing poverty in the developing world, although I realize the >people receiving the jobs do benefit from having them in the sense >that even low wage work under difficult conditions is preferable to >no wage work and starvation. Indisputably, their poverty is more >desperate and destructive than what I see the this country. > However, there are other ways to think about and approach community >and economic development, and that is what I believe Friends' >organizations and publications are trying to help us do. > >I am not in sympathy with the intimation that professional experts >supportive of "good" outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic >globalization should exercise editorial control and decision-making >about what Friends' Journal should publish. I would like to see >articles and letters to the editor by such persons as well as other >sources of information that represent the "pro" side of this debate. > >I also would like to see us discuss these matters without impugning >the ethics, integrity, motives, and knowledge of those with whom we >disagree. In particular I would like to recognize the deep caring >for others and commitment to reducing the violence of poverty that >motivate persons who acknowledge benefits to outsourcing, >sweatshops, and globalization. Our debate is about strategy, not >who cares and who doesn't. > >I am attaching below a relatively brief list of organizations of >which I am aware that fight sweatshops and globalization and promote >alternative, just and sustainable development. If there are >problems with these groups or organizations, I would be extremely >interested in the details. > >Larry Osborne >West Knoxville Friends Meeting > >A. Some organizations critical of the exploitative aspects of >sweatshops and globalization: > > >Sweat Free Communities: >http://www.behindthelabel.org/campaigns/sfc/ > > >Sweatshop Watch: >http://www.sweatshopwatch.org/ > > >Co-op America's Guide to Ending Sweatshops and Promoting Fair Trade: >http://www.sweatshops.org/ > >B. Some organizations that promote just and sustainable community >and economic development: > > >Business for Social Responsibility: http://www.bsr.org/ > > >Business Ethics Magazine 100 Best Corporate Citizens: >http://www.business-ethics.com/100best.htm > > >The Calvert Social Index-a broad-based, rigorously constructed >benchmark for measuring the performance of large, US-based socially >responsible companies: >http://www.calvertgroup.com/sri_calvertindex.asp > > >The Conscious Consumer Project of the Center for the New American >Dream: >http://www.newdream.org/consumer/index.shtml > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Southern Appalachian Yearly Meeting and Association mailing list >posting address: sayma at kitenet.net >subscribe/unsubscribe: http://kitenet.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sayma -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moriah at preferred.com Tue May 18 14:03:20 2004 From: moriah at preferred.com (Mary Calhoun) Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:03:20 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] IMP^o^ 166 Clerk's computer off-line Message-ID: <00a801c43d02$abe113a0$b872fea9@LocalHost> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IMP ^o^ Bulletin 166 SAYMA Clerk's computer has difficulties . . . ---------------------------------------- . . . & is off-line indefinitely ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (from phone call with Sharon Annis, Clerk of SAYMA) <|> Please share with your meeting or worship group. <|> Sharon Annis' e-mail reception has been hit-&-miss about two weeks, and her computer is now off-line indefinitely. <|> If you sent e-mail to Sharon after May 1, and haven't had an answer, please contact her (see below) to sort out what got lost and what got through. <|> Please also use phone or postal-mail to contact her until further notice. <|> Sharon Annis: 865/ 483-8783 869-A West Outer Drive Oak Ridge TN 37830 <|> Thanks for your patience and help! ~~~~~~ end ^o^ ~~~~~~ 1stpost 051804 ~~~~~ _______________________________________ IMP ^o^ ... "Information Made Present" is a bulletin service of the SAYMA office to provide practical details to our geographically-challenged Yearly Meeting via our free list-server: semi-official information, bulletins that you can print, post, announce, publish, or pass around. Please address questions, corrections and additions to AdminAsst at sayma.org, 276-628-5852 (machine; in-person Tu/Th 5-7:30p), or SAYMA Admin Asst, PO Box 2191, Abingdon, VA 24212-2191. Thank you! ^o^ ----------------------------------------------------- To receive IMP^o^ bulletins, subscribe to the free list server, sayma at kitenet.net. You can subscribe on the web at http://kitenet.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sayma. ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhminshall at comcast.net Tue May 18 19:04:13 2004 From: jhminshall at comcast.net (Janet Minshall) Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 19:04:13 -0400 Subject: [afmdiscussion] Re: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization In-Reply-To: <002a01c43ce8$45041070$6101a8c0@amd1gig> References: <002a01c43ce8$45041070$6101a8c0@amd1gig> Message-ID: Thanks to Julia Ewen for pointing out the role of the unions in the limited success of labor organizing that occurred in the South (the film "Norma Rae" tells that story). from Julia's message on 5-18-04: >"Today, if the workers in the LDC's are to experience fair wages and decent >working conditions, raising costs of production to the point that jobs no >longer are being drained from the developed countries, it will probably have >to be by the same means as it happened here. People will have to band >together and refuse to work for the wages and conditions currently being >offered. And it will probably take "outside agitators" coming in to make it >possible for the local workers to succeed. When workers go out on strike >here they have been backed by the donations of money and food and clothing >contributed by other union members outside the area of the strike. It will >be necessary for the workers in the LDCs to be supported in the same way... > >The violence associated with union actions in this country have tended to >make many Friends unsupportive of unions, even though deploring the business >owners' exploitation of the workers. >It must be possible to mount worker movements that are nonviolent. The >principles of Ghandhi and Martin Luther King are applicable to any number of >situations. However the response of those in the power positions is inclined >to be violent even when the tactics of the movement are not violent. >Sometimes people in the movement deliberately provoke violent response from >the other side. It has happened in union action here. It has happened in the >peace movement here in the 60's and 70's. So it becomes problematic for some >Friends as to how and to what degree we participate in these secular >movements. >To what extent are we contributing to violence by being a part of movements >in which violence is incidental to action? And in ignoring the incidental >violence because the intended end is good, do we fall into the same patterns >of thinking that contribute to good people supporting wars "to make the >country safe" or to "spread democracy"? And yet "for evil to succeed it is >necessary only for good people to do nothing"....What does the Spirit say to >us in regard to situation of our brothers and sisters who labor in the LDCs >for less than we believe their labor is really worth?" > The real problem, Julia, is that we actually believe that we have the right to determine whether our brothers and sisters in Less Developed Countries should work "...for less than we believe their labor is really worth?" and also that we believe that we should have a say about the conditions of their employment. We have assumed that they cannot make informed decisions for themselves. They can and they do all the time, and many of them wonder how we can sit here well-fed and comfortable in our houses with electricity and indoor plumbing and tell them what they can not or should not do. Most of them recognize on some level that their country has little or no infrastructure and that prospective employers will probably have to develop on-site water sources and large scale septic tanks for organic wastes, a really large electric generation system will have to be imported and installed, reliable mail and telephone systems will have to be developed, as well as computer hook-ups which are needed in order to do business. There are also roads that will take truck traffic to be built, and shipping docks that will take cargo ships to construct. Lower wages than those paid in the US are quite appropriate when the costs of setting up are so enormous and the prices of food and other necessities in the local area are usually so low. They know that, these poor people you want to protect from economic development, and they want the jobs anyway. Janet >Thanks to Janet Minshall for pointing out from the Northern viewpoint the >"outsourcing" movement of the early 20th century, which I mentioned from the >Southern point of view some weeks ago. Janet wrote: > >Subject: [afmdiscussion] Re: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and >economic globalization Janet wrote on 5-18-04: > > Actually, the process of globalization has been going on for a very >> long time. The pace of globalization was even faster in the early >> part of the 20th century than it is now. Outsourcing, too has been >> happening for a long time. It is only now, however, that many are >> noticing. My spouse's father went bankrupt in New York City when the >> textile mills there began to close down and reopen in the South in >> order to take advantage of cheaper labor. In New York as well as in >> New England at the time there was rising unemployment, declining >> standards of living and community decay while the South began to >> industrialize and slowly to grow and prosper. What happened in New >> York was that new, more technologically advanced industries developed >> and eventually filled the gaps left by the loss of the textile mills >> to the South. >> >> Many a Yankee close to the textile industry at the time complained >> about the exploitation of poor Southern workers and spoke of >> "protecting" them from the evils of economic development just as >> anti-globalization folks now speak of "protecting" the poor in Less >> Developed Countries from the evils of economic development. > >However, the difference between the situation in the United States then and >the would be protectors of the LDCs now is that there was a strong union >movement in the North in the United States. And instead of leaving a clear >field to sentimental "protectors" of the depressed Southern way of life, the >Northern unions sent organizers south and made a serious effort to unionize >the textile industry. Terrorism by both sides ensued, owners against workers >and workers against owners and scabs. National guardsmen and sometimes >federal troops were involved in putting down the violence. In the end, the >unions were less successful in the South than in the North, and what worker >gains there were could be seen as owners striking a compromise that did >improve the workers' wages and conditions but kept the unions at bay. >It was not just altruism that motivated the unions to attempt to organize >the South. By raising the wages and working standards of Southerners, they >hoped to protect their own jobs. They had struggled long and hard at the >cost of much violent conflict and lives to secure the living wage and >working conditions that they had. > >Today, if the workers in the LDC's are to experience fair wages and decent >working conditions, raising costs of production to the point that jobs no >longer are being drained from the developed countries, it will probably have >to be by the same means as it happened here. People will have to band >together and refuse to work for the wages and conditions currently being >offered. And it will probably take "outside agitators" coming in to make it >possible for the local workers to succeed. When workers go out on strike >here they have been backed by the donations of money and food and clothing >contributed by other union members outside the area of the strike. It will >be necessary for the workers in the LDCs to be supported in the same way... > >The violence associated with union actions in this country have tended to >make many Friends unsupportive of unions, even though deploring the business >owners' exploitation of the workers. >It must be possible to mount worker movements that are nonviolent. The >principles of Ghandhi and Martin Luther King are applicable to any number of >situations. However the response of those in the power positions is inclined >to be violent even when the tactics of the movement are not violent. >Sometimes people in the movement deliberately provoke violent response from >the other side. It has happened in union action here. It has happened in the >peace movement here in the 60's and 70's. So it becomes problematic for some >Friends as to how and to what degree we participate in these secular >movements. >To what extent are we contributing to violence by being a part of movements >in which violence is incidental to action? And in ignoring the incidental >violence because the intended end is good, do we fall into the same patterns >of thinking that contribute to good people supporting wars "to make the >country safe" or to "spread democracy"? And yet "for evil to succeed it is >necessary only for good people to do nothing"....What does the Spirit say to >us in regard to situation of our brothers and sisters who labor in the LDCs >for less than we believe their labor is really worth? > >Julia Parker Ewen >Atlanta Friends Meeting From freepolazzo at comcast.net Wed May 19 07:23:53 2004 From: freepolazzo at comcast.net (free polazzo) Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 07:23:53 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Fwd: Political chicken humor Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040519070706.02c8d6a0@mail.comcast.net> Hi Everyone, Time to laugh at ourselves! > Why did the chicken cross the road? > > > > GEORGE W. BUSH > > > > We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We >just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road or not. >The chicken is either against us or for us. There is no middle ground >here. > > > > COLIN POWELL > > Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satel- >lite image of the chicken crossing the road. > > > > HANS BLIX > > We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have >not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road. > > > > JOHN KERRY > > Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am >now against it! > > > > RALPH NADER > > The chicken's habitat on the other side of the road had been > >polluted by unchecked industrial greed. The chicken did not reach the > >unspoiled habitat on the other side of the road because it was crushed >by the wheels of a gas-guzzling SUV. > > > > PAT BUCHANAN > > To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American. > > > > RUSH LIMBAUGH > > I don't know why the chicken crossed the road, but I'll bet >it was getting a government grant to cross the road, and I'll bet >that somebody out there is already forming a support group to help >chickens with crossing-the-road syndrome. Can you believe this? >How much more of this can real Americans take? Chickens crossing >the road paid for by their tax dollars. And when I say tax dollars, I'm >talking about your money, money the government took from you to >build a road for chickens to cross. > > > > MARTHA STEWART > > No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was >going. I had a standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs >when the price dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any >insider information. > > > > JERRY FALWELL > > Because the chicken was gay - isn't it obvious? Can't you >people see the plain truth in front of your face? The chicken was >going to the "other side." That's what they call it the other side. >Yes, my friends, that chicken is gay. And if you eat that chicken, >you will become gay, too. I say we boycott all chickens until we sort >out this abomination that the liberal media whitewashes with seemingly >harmless phrases like "the other side." > > > > DR SEUSS > > Did the chicken cross the road? > > Did he cross it with a toad? > > Yes, the chicken crossed the road, > > But why it crossed I've not been told. > > > > ERNEST HEMINGWAY > > To die in the rain. Alone. > > > > MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR > > I envision a world where all chickens will be free to cross >roads without having their motives called into question. > > > > GRANDPA > > In my day, we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. > >Somebody told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good >enough. > > > > BARBARA WALTERS > > Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listen- >ing to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heartwarming story >of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to >accomplish its lifelong dream of crossing the road. > > > > JOHN LENNON > > Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads > together - >in peace. > > > > ARISTOTLE > > It is the nature of chickens to cross the road. > > > > KARL MARX > > It was an historic inevitability. > > > > RONALD REAGAN > > What chicken? > > > > CAPTAIN KIRK > > To boldly go where no chicken has ever gone before. > > > > SIGMUND FREUD > > The fact that you are at all concerned that the chicken >crossed the road reveals your underlying sexual insecurity. > > > > BILL GATES > > I have just witnessed eChicken2004, which will not only > >crossroads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and >balance your checkbook, - and Internet Explorer is an integral part >of eChicken. > > > > ALBERT EINSTEIN > > Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move > >beneath the chicken? > > > > BILL CLINTON > > I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your > >definition of chicken? > > > > AL GORE > > I invented the chicken! > > > > THE BIBLE > > And God came down from heaven, and he said unto the >chicken: THOU SHALT CROSS THE ROAD. And the chicken didst cross >the road, and there was rejoicing. > > > > COLONEL SANDERS > > Did I miss one? > >***** > > Free "The greatest ally of injustice is silence" From jhminshall at comcast.net Thu May 20 09:21:06 2004 From: jhminshall at comcast.net (Janet Minshall) Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 09:21:06 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] Fwd: Social Concerns: The System and its Failures Message-ID: >Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 19:40:34 -0400 >To: earthcare at yahoogroups.com >From: Janet Minshall >Subject: Re: [earthcare] real causes of social system failure >Cc: lphilip at mail.netidea.com > >Hi Lynne Phillips, I appreciate your "rant" as you call it, but >disagree with several points you have made. I also noticed that >your message to the Earthcare folk left out an important section of >my message to which you were apparently replying, so I have revised >my message back to what was originally sent to Stan Becker and the >Earthcare list and placed it and Stan's message below yours. > >Lynne, I am trying to get folks to think beyond the present to what >I see as the most likely of futures. The way things are going I >don't believe that our government or any government is going to go >out of its' way to set limits on pollution or build atmospheric >bubbles to preserve the environment, but they may actually increase >the inflow of refugees and immigrants to preserve the tax base and >social programs just to forestall unrest. Then it will be up to our >children and decendants to find other ways to preserve the >environment -- maybe even atmospheric bubbles. > >Yes, there are and have been problems with the free market economic >system, Capitalism, that has developed primarily in Western Europe >and North America over the past 300 - 700 years depending upon when >you see it starting. (Historically Merchant Capitalism was in place >long before the system we now know as Capitalism and may date as far >back as the Fourteenth Century. Many of the relations of modern >Capitalism, along with the general use of money were established as >Feudalism broke down and then was superceded between the Tenth >Century and the Sixteenth Century. During this period, unevenly, >property became capital manifesting itself no longer in specific >goods such as heads of horses and cattle, pounds of silver, or acres >of land, but as an abstract sum of infinitely flexible use whose >"value" was its capacity to earn rent, interest or profit. "None of >these changes was planned, clearly foreseen, or for that matter, >welcomed." The preceding is a loose paraphrase and then a quote >from Robert L. Heilbroner's old economics text "The Economic >Problem", Second Edition, copyright 1968-70.) > >I cite this bit of economic history to reinforce for you that the >Capitalist system was not "thought up" or "designed", it happened. >Income has never been distributed fairly, either by tribal leaders, >or by kings and nobles, or by presidents and prime ministers. The >world, over time, has moved from being controlled for the benefit of >a very few people who were rich to being controlled for the benefit >of many who are rich. Wealth has been dramatically spread over a >wider and wider population ever since the Magna Carta took away some >of the holdings of the King of England and transferred them to the >nobles. Later the French Revolution and the American Revolution >transferred more of the wealth from the nobility to white European >men over the age of 35, usually merchants or landowners. Now the >number of millionaires in the US and Western Europe grows >dramatically -- faster in times of prosperity such as the huge >stockmarket bubble in the late '90s, and slower in times of >recession and depression, as does the middle class the world over. > >I resettled refugees for ten years as regional coordinator of >immigration and refugee services for a large Christian denomination. >I know first hand that the primary reason people leave their >homeland is war and civil strife, and the secondary reason, just as >compelling, is economic opportunity -- jobs. It is this quest for >jobs and a "better" life which could provide the way to deal with >the looming crisis of population decline all over the world. The >great decline has already started in Europe and among the Western >European population of the US (and probably in Canada, too) and thus >far shows no sign of reversing. It well may proceed very much as >the stockmarket proceeds -- first there is a big move downward, >followed by several small moves upward, and then there is another >big move down. It is uneven, like the development of Capitalism. > >I think you are right that the problem of bringing the rich and the >poor to a more equitable balance is a political one but I disagree >that it can be solved by demanding change from our politicians. >They already seem to have been bought and paid for. (I'll vote >Democratic anyway, just in case.) Friends seem to believe that >corporations are the embodiment of evil, but they really aren't. >Corporations are made up of human beings with human faults such as >greed and grandiosity. Some of them, however, are now beginning to >face the fact that many of their customers, employees, staff and >shareholders care more about the environment and human rights than >they do about outsized profits. (I say outsized profits because >every corporation, even not-for-profit ones, must make a profit in >order to continue in existence and thus provide jobs for the rest of >us. When there is NO profit, jobs are lost. It is a narrowing of >the difference between the salaries of top management and the >ordinary worker that I'm after. Even our beloved wider Quaker >organizations have widened that salary difference dramatically >during my watch). I hope Friends will take seriously the suggestion >to become a shareholder in a corporation they wish to change. >Shareholder activism works. Corporations MUST respond to the >expressed concerns of their customers and their shareholders in >order to stay in business. > >I like your final quote "It is not necessary to have hope in order >to undertake a task. It is not necessary to succeed in order to >persevere", by William the Silent. > >I will add a favorite of mine from Henry James' The Middle Years (a >mostly boring book, unfortunately): > >"We work in the dark. We do what we can. We give what we have. Our >doubt is our passion. Our passion is our task. The rest is the >madness of art." > > >-- or the madness of politics, or economics, or history. Janet Minshall > > >Lynne, and any other Canadians who are reading this, please forgive >me for referring repeatedly to the "US and Western Europe", I >probably should have said "North America and Western Europe". J > > >Lynne Phillips wrote to the Earthcare list on 5-19-04: > >>Dear all, >> >>There is a genuine population problem but there is an even more serious >>problem with our free market economic system which promotes "development" >>in order to maximize return on investments for and by the privileged. Even >>with its current population burden, we humans could adequately clothe, >>feed, and educate all of humanity if we cared enough to distribute income >>fairly. As it is, the uneven distribution of control over resources and >>power is leading the US and much of the world into greater gaps between the >>rich and the poor. In addition, the value of consumerism which is driving >>the economies of the industrial capitalist world, has created a >>monster. According to some scientists and economists, if everyone were to >>live at the same standard as the ordinary Canadian, we would need 6 to 7 >>planet Earths to support that level. Modern industrial nations have been >>robbing planet Earth of its natural and social capital. The people >>responsible for the consequences of taking resources beyond the capability >>of the ecosystems to sustain the loss will probably not be around to suffer >>the consequences, but future generations will. Why do Mexicans, Chinese, >>Africans, etc. try to enter the US, Canada, GB, etc? Not because they >>hate their homeland. Although there are many reasons for immigrating, the >>most common one is because they are driven out by poverty or lack of >>opportunity in countries with failing social systems. >> >>Planet Earth has undergone at least two major life extinctions in its >>history. We may be causing a third one. In the cosmic scheme of things >>the loss of Earth's biosphere, as we know it, is insignificant. After all, >>we have only 5 billion years until the sun goes through its cycle and fries >>the Earth on its way towards being a white dwarf. As for me, I would like >>to die knowing that this beautiful and for all we know - unique - planet >>can continue to evolve without the handicap of human greed. >> >>The solutions to Earth's problems begin at the political level. If >>governments have any power to control corporations, that is where the >>revolution must begin. An economically and ecologically literate citizenry >>could be aroused to demand a social system that follows ethical >>principles. And so on. I don't see it happening in the US and probably >>not in Canada either. We are captive to the barrage of propaganda that >>mesmerizes us on a daily basis as we sit obediently in front of our TV >>sets. Not to mention all the toys we can buy or the promises of toys, if >>we are good boys and girls. >> >>If you have read this far, thanks for hanging in on my rant. I am >>heartsick at what has happened to my province (British Columbia) since the >>neo-conservative "Liberal" government was elected 4 years ago and declared >>that BC is "open for business". It has been good business for a few, but >>for the many - esp. the young, the poor, women, the elderly, the ill, the >>indigeneous peoples and other ethnic minorities, it has resulted in a >>steady erosion of income, health care, and educational opportunities. The >>income gap between rich and poor has widened more in BC than any other >>Canadian province. And so on. >> >>I found this quotation decades ago. I pull it out on occasions like this >>to console myself: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to undertake >>a task. It is not necessary to succeed in order to persevere" William >>the Silent We do what can be done according to the ethical principles >>scripted by all the world's great religions. It is the only way to live if >>we wish to walk in the Light. >> >>In Friendship, >>Lynne Phillips >> >> >>NOTE CHANGE OF ADDRESS >> >>L & M Phillips >>PO Box 1557 >>Rossland, BC >>British Columbia >>V0G 1Y0 >>CANADA >> > > >Janet wrote in response to Stan Becker on 5-19-04 > >Hi Stan, As to the three options in your message below, the >Europeans are busily encouraging fertility but their encouragement >doesn't seem to be working. We may have no choice but to let >population decline. If that is the case then the issue is not one >of reducing population growth in the short term but rather of >planning for the coming long term decline. It is that planning >process I want to see acknowledged and begun. > >It may be that the US and Western Europe could extend their social >and health services for a period of time by admitting more refugees >and immigrants who are looking for employment and would be most >willing to pay income taxes and help support Social >Security/Medicare/Medicaid costs just for the privilege of working. >The populations of the US and Western Europe would then be >considerably more diverse than they are at present. This would >likely engender a racial/religious backlash unless we start soon to >effectively defuse relations between WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon >Protestants) and peoples of color and of other non-WASP ethnic >cultures. But this would also leave much of the rest of the world >without its brightest and most industrious people who would have >immigrated to the US and Western Europe for better jobs. Employment >immigration would not add to the planet's population load but it >would significantly add to the difficulties of incorporating large >numbers of additional people into US and Western European cities and >suburbs where employment tends to be concentrated. I think, too, >that there would be concentrated centers of employment in India and >China, and perhaps in Japan. > >Do we write off the areas of employment as environmental losses and >focus instead on creating pollution limits (very difficult to >achieve) or atmospheric bubbles (not so difficult to achieve) for >the cities and suburbs so that their atmospheres will not >contaminate the protected areas of forests, wetlands, prairies and >beaches surrounding them? How then do we minimize the health >effects of working in such areas of employment? Gas masks for >everyone? And will this kind of concentration create enough in the >way of economic proceeds to provide health and social services for >those who are born seriously handicapped and not able to work, or >who become ill and are unable to work. (The current estimate of >money going out of the US to the families of illegal and newly >arrived refugees and immigrants runs from $30 billion to over $100 >billion a year.) > >I want to hear serious comments and suggestions of alternatives. >Janet Minshall > >(In my original posting I also included much of the background >material from the list but for the sake of brevity I have not done >that this time. J) > > > >>From Stan Becker 5-19-04: >>Janet >> >>Greetings. >> >>Your solution to the problem of adding 70-80 million persons to the >>planet each year is unclear to me. We are working to reduce population >>GROWTH. On the other hand, where population is in decline there seem >>three options: 1. let it decline; 2. encourage immigration; 3. encourage >>fertility. From the perspective of other species on the planet, 1 is >>not unreasonable; after all we were 2.5 billion on the planet in 1950 so >>nothing magic about 6.3 billion we are now. >> >>Atlanta is an area of rapid growth; what are you suggesting for it?. US >>is growing by 3 million per year....... >> >>Stan >> >>P.S. Good news; I believe the adoption pamphlet will finally come out >>this summer. From listener at bellsouth.net Thu May 20 20:25:27 2004 From: listener at bellsouth.net (Kit Potter) Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 19:25:27 -0500 Subject: [saymaListserv] FW: Wear red on Fridays to show opposition to administration policies! Message-ID: <001701c43eca$1de3f0d0$6701a8c0@heyoka> For your information: do as you may be led. Kit Potter -----Original Message----- From: Patti George [mailto:patirgeorge at yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 3:22 PM To: lewis Beth Subject: Wear red on Fridays to show opposition to administration policies! Subject: Freedom Fridays The following came from a friend of my mother. Sounds like a good idea to me, so I thought I would share it. My name is Nadia Jensen and I have an idea for a quiet revolution. Please take 5 minutes to read my email and then help me if you can: Here's some history behind this idea: When Norway was occupied by Germany in 1940, Norwegian women began to knit RED caps for children as a way of letting everyone know that they did not like what was happening in their country, that they didn't like having their freedom taken away by the Nazis. My great aunt, Karin Knudson Myrstad, was one of the women who knit red caps for her children and others. Similarly, in Denmark, women knit red-white-and blue caps (colors of the Allies) for the very same reason. The result was that whenever Norwegians and Danes left their homes --to go to the store, to work, etc, they could see that THE MAJORITY opposed what was going on in their country. As you know, both countries organized effective Resistance efforts and changed history -- everything that happened began simply by wearing red!!!! (or the colors of the Allies, in Denmark). I believe, as many of us do, that at the very heart of our democracy is our right to oppose certain policies of our government. Increasingly, our Government is redefining "freedom" in ways that make too many Americans perceive that it is risky to oppose his policies -- and, in particular, current inroads about individual freedoms and policies in the U.S. and abroad. However, many of us DO oppose what our government is doing to individual rights--and I have an idea that will allow all of us to recognize each other very easily so we can see that WE ARE THE MAJORITY. SO... I have been thinking that it's time to take action in a way that is effective and easy for all of us to do: Just wear red every Friday between now and election day. Wear a little or a lot-- just be sure that when you leave your house to go about your day -- to work, to school, to the store, to the gas station, wherever you go in your daily routine -- that everyone who sees you will see that you are wearing red because you believe in freedom and you don't agree with our current administration's policies at home and abroad. I'm really certain that we'll see that lots of us wearing red for freedom -- because WE ARE THE MAJORITY. We just need a way to show each other who we are!!! Between now and election day, ask everyone you know to wear red for "Freedom Fridays". I have already spread the word to friends and have had a very enthusiastic response. This email has been forwarded around the country by many who receive it - feel free to send in on to your friends and co-workers. Nadia Jensen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70/year -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vmbra at aol.com Sun May 23 21:31:37 2004 From: Vmbra at aol.com (Vmbra at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 21:31:37 EDT Subject: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization Message-ID: In a message dated 5/17/2004 1:22:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, losborne at cn.edu writes: I also would like to see us discuss these matters without impugning the ethics, integrity, motives, and knowledge of those with whom we disagree. In particular I would like to recognize the deep caring for others and commitment to reducing the violence of poverty that motivate persons who acknowledge benefits to outsourcing, sweatshops, and globalization. Our debate is about strategy, not who cares and who doesn?t. That Friend speaks my mind. Charles Schade Charleston, WV -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From freepolazzo at comcast.net Mon May 24 17:59:04 2004 From: freepolazzo at comcast.net (free polazzo) Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 17:59:04 -0400 Subject: [saymaListserv] 'Nick Berg Was a Soldier of Peace' Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040524175854.02bf9950@mail.comcast.net> Hi Friends, A beautiful letter by a dad about his son. Free >'Nick Berg Was a Soldier of Peace' >-------------------- > >'My son's ... work still goes on.' > > >May 23 2004 > >Michael Berg is the father of Nicholas Berg, the American contractor who >was beheaded in Iraq. The following is excerpted from a letter he sent to >be read on Saturday at the Stop the War Coalition demonstration in London. > >The complete article can be viewed at: >http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-berg23may23,0,2298679.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions > > >Visit Latimes.com at http://www.latimes.com Free "The greatest ally of injustice is silence" From jewen at bellsouth.net Tue May 18 10:56:15 2004 From: jewen at bellsouth.net (jewen at bellsouth.net) Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:56:15 -0400 Subject: [afmdiscussion] Re: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization References: Message-ID: <002a01c43ce8$45041070$6101a8c0@amd1gig> Thanks to Janet Minshall for pointing out from the Northern viewpoint the "outsourcing" movement of the early 20th century, which I mentioned from the Southern point of view some weeks ago. Janet wrote: Subject: [afmdiscussion] Re: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization > Actually, the process of globalization has been going on for a very > long time. The pace of globalization was even faster in the early > part of the 20th century than it is now. Outsourcing, too has been > happening for a long time. It is only now, however, that many are > noticing. My spouse's father went bankrupt in New York City when the > textile mills there began to close down and reopen in the South in > order to take advantage of cheaper labor. In New York as well as in > New England at the time there was rising unemployment, declining > standards of living and community decay while the South began to > industrialize and slowly to grow and prosper. What happened in New > York was that new, more technologically advanced industries developed > and eventually filled the gaps left by the loss of the textile mills > to the South. > > Many a Yankee close to the textile industry at the time complained > about the exploitation of poor Southern workers and spoke of > "protecting" them from the evils of economic development just as > anti-globalization folks now speak of "protecting" the poor in Less > Developed Countries from the evils of economic development. However, the difference between the situation in the United States then and the would be protectors of the LDCs now is that there was a strong union movement in the North in the United States. And instead of leaving a clear field to sentimental "protectors" of the depressed Southern way of life, the Northern unions sent organizers south and made a serious effort to unionize the textile industry. Terrorism by both sides ensued, owners against workers and workers against owners and scabs. National guardsmen and sometimes federal troops were involved in putting down the violence. In the end, the unions were less successful in the South than in the North, and what worker gains there were could be seen as owners striking a compromise that did improve the workers' wages and conditions but kept the unions at bay. It was not just altruism that motivated the unions to attempt to organize the South. By raising the wages and working standards of Southerners, they hoped to protect their own jobs. They had struggled long and hard at the cost of much violent conflict and lives to secure the living wage and working conditions that they had. Today, if the workers in the LDC's are to experience fair wages and decent working conditions, raising costs of production to the point that jobs no longer are being drained from the developed countries, it will probably have to be by the same means as it happened here. People will have to band together and refuse to work for the wages and conditions currently being offered. And it will probably take "outside agitators" coming in to make it possible for the local workers to succeed. When workers go out on strike here they have been backed by the donations of money and food and clothing contributed by other union members outside the area of the strike. It will be necessary for the workers in the LDCs to be supported in the same way... The violence associated with union actions in this country have tended to make many Friends unsupportive of unions, even though deploring the business owners' exploitation of the workers. It must be possible to mount worker movements that are nonviolent. The principles of Ghandhi and Martin Luther King are applicable to any number of situations. However the response of those in the power positions is inclined to be violent even when the tactics of the movement are not violent. Sometimes people in the movement deliberately provoke violent response from the other side. It has happened in union action here. It has happened in the peace movement here in the 60's and 70's. So it becomes problematic for some Friends as to how and to what degree we participate in these secular movements. To what extent are we contributing to violence by being a part of movements in which violence is incidental to action? And in ignoring the incidental violence because the intended end is good, do we fall into the same patterns of thinking that contribute to good people supporting wars "to make the country safe" or to "spread democracy"? And yet "for evil to succeed it is necessary only for good people to do nothing"....What does the Spirit say to us in regard to situation of our brothers and sisters who labor in the LDCs for less than we believe their labor is really worth? Julia Parker Ewen Atlanta Friends Meeting From jewen at bellsouth.net Thu May 20 11:02:11 2004 From: jewen at bellsouth.net (jewen at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 11:02:11 -0400 Subject: Fw: [afmdiscussion] Re: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops, and economic globalization Message-ID: <005c01c43e7b$6dbd7990$6101a8c0@amd1gig> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Janet Minshall" Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [afmdiscussion] Re: [saymaListserv] Outsourcing, sweatshops,and economic globalization > > Janet Minshall wrote: > > > The real problem, Julia, is that we actually believe that we have the > > right to determine whether our brothers and sisters in Less Developed > > Countries should work "...for less than we believe their labor is > > really worth?" and also that we believe that we should have a say > > about the conditions of their employment. We have assumed that they > > cannot make informed decisions for themselves. They can and they do > > all the time, and many of them wonder how we can sit here well-fed > > and comfortable in our houses with electricity and indoor plumbing > > and tell them what they can not or should not do. > > > > Most of them recognize on some level that their country has little or > > no infrastructure and that prospective employers will probably have > > to develop on-site water sources and large scale septic tanks for > > organic wastes, a really large electric generation system will have > > to be imported and installed, reliable mail and telephone systems > > will have to be developed, as well as computer hook-ups which are > > needed in order to do business. There are also roads that will take > > truck traffic to be built, and shipping docks that will take cargo > > ships to construct. Lower wages than those paid in the US are quite > > appropriate when the costs of setting up are so enormous and the > > prices of food and other necessities in the local area are usually so > > low. They know that, these poor people you want to protect from > > economic development, and they want the jobs anyway. Janet > > This is the same process that occurred in the USA when Northern jobs went > South into the Southern Piedmont and the mountain foothills. People came out > of the deep country and down from the mountains to work in the factories, > and they had been existing in very "basic" conditions without running water > or electricity or modern education and medical care. For them the "slave > wages" being paid by Yankee owners and managers looked like big money. Many > did not see cash money from one harvest season to the next. > > When they moved into company owned housing and bought goods on credit > against their paychecks from the company store, it seemed to them that they > had a better situation than the one they had left. In reality what happened > was that they became de facto endentured servants as the money owed to the > company exceeded their low real wages, and even when better opportunities > became available they were unable to leave, because their terms of > employment said they could not leave unless they satisfied all debts to the > company. Local police enforced the employers' rights against the workers. It > was jail or slavery. Meanwhile, as jobs went South, the unions had to > struggle in the North to keep wages at a level that would support a decent > living standard for those workers, who were used to electricity and running > water and schools and even some medical care...and still wages were falling > as Northerners fought the exporting of jobs Southward. > > When the "outside agitators" came South to help organize Southern textile > workers, yes, they believed that working men and women in the South were > human beings entitled to be treated as well as their Northern brothers and > sisters. But also they were motivated to protect themselves from becoming > enslaved to the same low wages and exploitative "company store" and "company > town" system as the Southern workers were experiencing. The movie The > Dollmaker, starring Jane Fonda, is one example of a story depicting the > social disruption and exploitation of Southern workers under that system. > > Something very similar is happening in the off-shore movement of jobs to > LDCs in our own generation. > It was in the interests of Northen business owners rather than either the > Northern or the Southern workers for Southern wages and living conditions to > remain depressed. That Southern workers considered such wages and conditions > as a step up from poverty did not justify the use of them as defacto slaves, > any more than the continuance of de facto African American slavery through > the share cropping system could be justified by the claim that the African > American farmers' lot was better because they were no longer the legal > property of white farmers. That many African Americans voted with their feet > by remaining on such farms did not justify people in allowing the > exploitation of their labor to continue. The same thing is true of the > exploitation of the LDCs' workforce. > > My argument is not with the intent of those who want to keep the labor of > LDCs from being exploited, my argument is against the romantic fantasy that > people enjoy living without modern sanitation and electricity and medical > care and education, and that it is therefore okay to pay them substandard > wages, and in the name of protecting the earth from global warming and > overpopulation it is okay to let disease and hunger diminish their numbers, > and that by riding bicycles and eating only vegetables here and boycotting > the sweatshop products we have made life better for them. > > A living wage is necessary, one that provides sanitary living conditions > (which helps babies and mothers survive) and electricity (which allows the > sort of mechanization that alleviates the backbreaking labor of women in the > homes and fields). To get that living wage, people will put up with > conditions in the factories that we consider slave labor conditions. But > that does not mean that such people either enjoy or desire to work under > those conditions. It just means that they are motivated. They will do what > is necessary to get for their children better than they had. > > To attract and retain the Western corporations LDCs will tolerate and even > give financial incentives to companies that exploit, abuse and destroy > resources, many unrenewable. Do we do nothing because we fear to be called > patronizing, arrogant or, worse, racist? Do we really believe that the > leadership in LDCs does not realize what is going on? That is arrogant and > patronizing on our part! > > Yes, they decline to raise standards of environmental protection and worker > protection in order to attract the jobs. But, do we think that the leaders > of LDCs have unmixed motives, that they are not lining their own pockets at > the expense of the workers? In the South there were certain already- > moneyed interests that benefitted by the Northern businesses moving South > and exploiting the Southern labor force in the USA. Do we not understand > that the same thing is happening in the LDCs? > > While we do not solve the problems of the LDC worker by boycotting the > products of sweatshops, thus forcing them into worse paid and more unhealthy > and more dangerous work to get the same level of pay, we do them a > disservice to tolerate the conditions that allow the exploitation of their > labor for less than it really worth. How it can be done without harming the > LDC's economy is the challenge. > > When I lived in Africa we tried to pay our workers in our home American > wages, and we were asked by the African government not to do that. It was > not sustainable on the local economy after we had gone back to USA. That is > the big problem in the LDCs as I see it. Not that Americans should not pay > better wages, but that the wage increases should be widespread enough and > sustainable. That corporations should be content with lower profit, but not > be robbed of all profit or thrown into the red in conducting operations in > LDCs. That USA corporations instead of exporting jobs should be content with > lower profit, but not be robbed of all profit or forced into the red by the > process of raising environement and labor protections in LDCs. > > In particular lives of women improve greatly when wages rise and modern > sanitation and electricity and medical care become affordable. Maybe men > don't think they have a problem laboring for substandard wages in > sweatshops, because when they go home at night, one or more women wash their > clothes, haul the water and wood, cook the food, wash up the dishes, by > means of hand labor. Pounding clothes on a rock in a stream or scrubbing > them on washboard and running them through a ringer sounds like a great idea > to us--easy on the environment--costs practically nothing...until it is YOUR > back that will not straighten all the way up due to the pain, even when you > lie down in bed at night. And chances are that Mom as well as Dad is also > working in one of those sweatshops for a 14 hour day! Doctoring with herbs > grown in your own garden sounds real romantic, even progressive, until it is > YOUR baby that comes down with measles and remains sick for years afterward > or dies from complications because the hospitals's sanitation is poor and > the doctors absent or overworked. Yes, workers in sweatshops are better off > than they were without those jobs, but that does not mean they don't like > the idea of being still better off. > > It is, as I said, a problem of how to do it, not whether. I think that the > workers of the world will call us something worse than arrogant or > patronizing or racist if we do NOT advocate a higher wage and standard of > living for them. They will call us cowardly, vain and self-centered > day-dreamers! If we fail to grapple with the real issues because we are > afraid of being called names, we are faint of heart indeed, and of no real > help to anyone!... > > Julia Parker Ewen > > > > >