I'm glad they have a job. Their families probably need it very much. I hope that their hard work allows the next generation of Congolese to live in greater prosperity.
I have seen the impact of mines like this first hand in many third world countries. It is not what you think.
The people work horrendous hours for a tiny amount of money - maybe 50 cents per day. At the end of the day they need to pay for food (no time to grow it) and pay for people to do things like make their shelter, clothes and transport (no time to do it for themselves). And so they have zero money left. They also work in horrible conditions and have a life expectancy of ~40.
In many countries (Cameroon, Bolivia, Ivory Coast, Senegal, etc. etc.) I have seen where this crosses a line, and the locals simply choose not to work and just go back to growing their own food etc. Often they are happier and better off.
Yes, this forces the wages to go up a tiny fraction, but in reality it is almost nothing, because there are always more naive country-folk coming in who think (as you do) "having a job is great" and they will "provide for their families" etc. By the time they figure out the whole thing is a terrible scam and quit, they already live in a slum in the city and can't go back. They are trapped. They probably even owe the mine some money or live in housing provided by the mine, so they are literally owned.
Your idealized view of Capitalism is plain wrong. It does not happen like that in countries that do not have strict labor laws. (and even then, I would argue that many in the USA are working-slaves)
Read Grapes of Wrath if you have not, it does a fantastic job of illustrating how people become trapped in extremely low-paying jobs with little to no choice.
I mean, I personally believe that there is a better option than to allow such mines to function, but if Apple can get away with holding the opposite opinion (as mentioned at the end of the article), then it probably deserves a response that doesn't attack one person's alleged view of Capitalism.
You are wrong to think I'm not aware of the grisly circumstances under which many work, or that I've never been in despicable situations myself, or that I'm not familiar with the literary works of the communist-leaning John Steinbeck. I stand by my original statement.
You don't get to compare reality against some imagined utopia where these mine jobs don't exist and everyone is fed and happy children are attending air conditioned schools with loving parents at home. You only get to compare against what would actually happen: the boys would become child soldiers because it beats hunger, and the girls will turn to prostitution. Now it is your turn to tell me this is a better outcome.
> Now it is your turn to tell me this is a better outcome
I can tell you what I have seen, not anything at all imagined.
I have seen hundreds of people quit their jobs in third world mines and other "western owned slave labor". So I can tell you first hand exactly the outcome that happens.
I have seen those people go back to growing their own food, making and washing their own clothes, building their own houses etc. They go back to being members of their communities. They have massively more food and water than they need, and quickly have a lot of social time. Now they have time to spend with their family and friends. They don't have much money, so often they won't own a car, but they have plenty of food and water and shelter and family time.
Their basic needs are met, and they have a good life.
Actually, it virtually all of the 15 countries I have been to in West Africa I have met hundreds and hundreds (and seen thousands) of people that have massively more leisure time than anyone I know in the Western World, and on the whole I would say people are happier. Certainly they have no stress, no timelines and don't answer to any boss. They have no alarms, and don't care what time it is on any given day (or what day it is).
This is not hollywood. This is not the world CNN tells you it is. Child soldiers and prostitution are not the only option, and in my experience in over 30 undeveloped countries, they are extremely rare.
What you write sounds good, and you seem to have the experience to back yourself up, but the overall picture doesn't make sense:
You say that people who stop doing this back-breaking, underpaid work end up better off. If that's the case, why are people still staying on the shitty job? Why aren't they making what looks like a no-brainer decision from our viewpoint?
As I said in the original comment, there are many possible reasons. They have already moved from their farm to live in a slum in the city, and can't go back. They probably owe some money for that move, maybe even they owe money to the mine. They maybe even live in mine-supplied housing.
Of course, the lure of "lots of money" is a strong one, and they will work for years and years thinking one day they will have the lucky break that will make the difference and pull them out of poverty. (side note: sound familiar? Look around you)
Like I said, read grapes of wrath to see an excellent account of how people head towards this "working dream" only to become disgustingly trapped working as slave labor, continually going backwards even though they work harder and harder. When they are unable they are kicked out to die and replaced.
And finally, many people do quit and attempt to get away from it all, but there is an endless stream of naive newcomers to continually staff the mine. (again, see this clearly shown in grapes of wrath)
Yeah, TINA. You do realize that examples of what you dismiss as utopia do - or did - exist? Particularly where they didn't catch the attention of USA obsessive war against Socialism.
Ha! You do realize that your line of argument basically is: "if I don't like something I'll just resort to calling it names." quite the same as that senile buffoon you elected to POTUS?
I take offense at the notion that because I disagree I must be ignorant and/or stupid. The other possibility is that I have heard all the arguments and found them lacking.
For the record I did not vote for Trump and referencing the president of the US is entirely off topic.
I wrote this earlier elsewhere, I'll throw it here for an anecdote from the northern corner of Europe.
About 109 years ago, my grandfather was a twelve-year-old boy and as all boys at that time and in his social class did, he went to work in the forest, logging trees with his father and brothers. Ours was not the poorest of families, but everyone had to work hard to make a living, and that meant also children.
A pile of logs came loose and rolled on his knee, crushing it. My folks were so well-off people in such a well-off area that they actually took the boy to a doctor - not everyone would have been able to do that - and the doctor said that his knee might never recover and he couldn't work in the forest.
"What use do I have for such a boy?" was my great-grandfather's reaction, in a tone of agitation and disbelief.
No tears for the boy, no expression of sympathy for the immense pain. It was simply the grief of losing labour, a pair of hands and feet that could work for the family, a family which had for generations made a living in subsistence farming but now could work the forests for the emerging paper and sawmill industries. He had no use for a boy that couldn't work.
That might sound totally heartless today, but those days, it was the natural reaction. A kid who couldn't contribute, e.g. in logging trees, was just a useless mouth to feed. My grandfather's knee mended eventually well enough for him to work, and he died of tuberculosis at the age of 56, a dozen years before I was born.
And our family was not at all the poorest of families; they lived in a nation that was at that time ahead in poverty reduction of where much of India, Bangladesh of Congo is now: there was even a new, universal school system! And there were those industries that were exploiting child labour.
How the world has changed. My own father still worked the forest with a horse; in between he went to a world war and then again worked the forest with a leg that was shot to pieces and did not mend well. His hands were rough with calluses. But mine are soft. Beside school I got a job at cemetery digging graves, earned money to buy a computer, became a software engineer. This is easy life.
But this is only possible because my grandfather was able to work as a child labourer.
Thank you for reading. I tend to get a bit emotional when I think how hard life was back then.
Today, when I go to poor places in the world (I don't do it so often but a week ago I was in Soweto, not the worst place in Africa though much different from wealthy and egalitarian Northern Europe) I see kids who do hard work cleaning up the streets etc. What I want them to have is a possibility to go to school; I don't want to deny them the possibility to do work and help the family to earn a living.
No, you're just glad to have won the sperm lottery and be born on the right side of the walled garden.
Where I'm sitting now - tapping on an iPhone btw, yes the hypocrisy of it all is deafening - it's a beautiful day and a couple just sat at a bar with their baby lieing in a pram.
Nobody here around me is digging heavy metal ridden rock win their bare hands.
If they survive, remain fertile and if their backs even allow them to pick up their own children. And if they can break the circle of "it's accepted kids should work becuase I did it too". A lot of ifs.
> I'm glad they have a job. Their families probably need it very much. I hope that their hard work allows the next generation of Congolese to live in greater prosperity.
It's hard to figure whether this comment is sarcastic or just ignorant of the whole situation with child exploitation in Africa.
There is no mind to open to the view point of those who lie to themselves in order to feel good about the misery of others. Yes, your comment is neither sarcastic or ignorant, it's pure cynicism, in the "great" tradition of the slavers.
Listen to yourself and your "feel good" fallacies. Do you really think these kids can quit? that they are not beaten if they try to escape or worse killed?
