[Note: As of fall 2007, Ron Paul has switched suppliers on caps and shirts and is relying solely on American Apparel, which manufactures in downtown Los Angeles. This makes the following article one of historical, not current, relevance.]
Notice to Americans who support Ron Paul because of his purported stands against international trade agreements that he says threaten American sovereignty: You have been cheated.
When it comes to Ron Paul’s positions on international free trade agreements, Ron Paul is a phony. The truth is that the Ron Paul for President 2008 campaign uses sweatshop labor made possible through those trade agreements. The Ron Paul 2008 campaign gets its message out by selling t-shirts that are made in sweatshops in foreign countries, by workers who have taken outsourced jobs that once were held by American workers.
Don’t believe me? Go ahead and have a look for yourself. Go to the Ron Paul for President web site and look up in the upper lefthand corner. You’ll see a link there that says “store”. At that store, the Ron Paul campaign sells shirts through CafePress. A few of those shirts are made in the USA by American Apparel. However, most of the shirts that Ron Paul sells are made by companies with a history of using factories in foreign countries that abuse workers and pay shamefully low wages.
Ron Paul is able to sell these t-shirts at low prices because of the international trade agreements that make the garment sweatshops in foreign countries possible. On his campaign web site, Ron Paul calls these international trade agreements “a threat to our independence as a nation.” However, Ron Paul turns right around and sells items, using the very same international trade agreements to do so at a low price!
Does Ron Paul have no shame? Did Ron Paul really think that we wouldn’t notice? Does he think the American people are that stupid?
It gets worse. You know what motto the Ron Paul campaign puts on those shirts made in sweatshops by underpaid foreign workers made available through international trade agreements? He uses the motto “Hope for America”.
Apparently, Ron Paul thinks that hope for America lies in sending American jobs overseas. Apparently, Ron Paul thinks that hope for America lies in factories that abuse their workers and evade environmental protections. Apparently, Ron Paul thinks that hope for America lies in international trade agreements.
If that’s really Ron Paul’s agenda for America, he ought to just come out and say so.
If that isn’t Ron Paul’s agenda for America, then he ought to stop being a hypocrite, and stop selling foreign-made sweatshop shirts on his campaign’s CafePress shop.
Note: I just deleted a message left here by Chris Lawton. I don’t normally delete messages, so I’ll tell you why I did in this case.
For the umpteenth time, Chris Lawton came on here and left a comment spam message promoting Ron Paul. It’s the identical message he’s left here before, and on many other blogs, starting with “GO RON PAUL! GO RON PAUL! GOD BLESS RON PAUL!”
Participation by people from many points of view who want to discuss the ideas related to our articles here at Irregular Times is welcome.
Cut and paste comment spam is not.
We treat all spam alike, whether it has to do with Viagra or with political candidates.
bwhahahahah!!! You’ve got to be kidding me. You must have ALOT of time on your hands.
“A few of those shirts are made in the USA by American Apparel. However,……” LOLOLOLOL
What exactly is a lot of laughs about Ron Paul using for his campaign the very same international trade agreements he criticizes as a betrayal of American sovereignty, TJ?
What exactly is a lot of laughs about the Ron Paul campaign supporting the outsourcing of American jobs overseas?
TJ, your response doesn’t have any substance at all, just a lot of empty enthusiasm.
What do you think about Ron Paul selling shirts that are made by companies that took jobs out of the United States in order to make bigger profits? Do you think that’s a good idea?
What’s funny is that, apparently, at least one libertarian actually lives up to the stereotype of libertarians — selfish assholes. Congratulations, TJ, you just shot your movement in the foot.
Time for me to make another contribution to the Paul campaign. I wonder if they have those shirts in my size.
It is a lie to use the terms ‘slavery’, or ‘exploitation’ to describe voluntary trading. It is a lie to pretend that a relationship with another person is your property. Only rapists, slavers, and Marxists (collectivists) believe that. It is very much a good idea to “take jobs out of the United States” if the poor of other countries want to voluntarily take those jobs. The hateful Marxist rhetoric tht pretends that (a) I am being ‘exploited’ if I voluntarily take a job you offer me because it is my better alternative and (b) I have a RIGHT to a job (a relationship) with you because I live in your country, is such stale and dishonest rhetoric, I wonder when it will end. Then I look at the tax (extortion) supported government education establishment, and I am not at all surprised that stupid, parasitic, Marxist rhetoric still finds its fans.
I don’t think Ron Paul ever said he is against free trade. He said he is against corporatism and he criticizes a lot of the free trade agreements as not really being free trade. He is against the WTO and other organizations the usurp our sovereignty. I fail to see how ordering t-shirts from overseas is against his principals. He is against farm subsidies but still probably buys his groceries in stores.
I’m not a Libertarian. I just think that this blog posting is equivalent to splitting hairs. I seriously doubt that Ron Paul, the man himself, sat down and said “Hey! Let’s go with this company eventhough I’m against this or that.” Come on. If you want to bring this up to anyone you should personally call the campaign headquarters and talk to the 19 year old college kid who’s responsible for maintaining their CafePress account because Ron Paul probably is oblivious of this point your raising. If you do that and they find validity in your point then they’ll make the necessary changes.
I see your point your making. I just don’t think it’s that big of a deal.
Okay, Bob. So you’re confirming that Ron Paul supporters love the idea of taking jobs out of the United States and exploiting workers while evading environmental protections and promoting international free trade agreements?
What a great endorsement for Ron Paul!
Sweatshops? Any evidence of this? ……waiting
Shamefully low wages? Have the individuals, who voluntarily took these jobs, expressed their shame to you, or are you just deploying the standard dishonest American labor union rhetoric, which seeks to stop poor people in foreign countries from taking jobs away from parasitic, government-dependent, American labor union members, thus depriving their communistic, coercion-is-best labor union bosses from collecting their ‘dues’.
Bringing this up would be like saying RP is a hypocrit for putting gasoline in his car since he opposes the foreign policies of ours that have been directed toward securing our oil interests overseas. Like when we put the Shah of Iran into power over oil in 1953. It’s splitting hairs.
Ron Paul supporters support voluntarism. What do the rest of you rhetorical magicians support?
Well, John, here’s a place to start for the Hanes shirts, which are among those sold through CafePress by Ron Paul:
http://cbae.nmsu.edu/~dboje/usas/pages/hanes_sara_lee_champion.htm
The only way to stop Ron Paul is to lie about his message. There’s no shortage of voluteers for this job. Unfortunately, lying is difficult when the internet provides so much information to so many.
John Howard: ok, how about if I hold up a gun and ask you to choose between the bullet and giving me your money? If you voluntarily give me your money because I provide you a better alternative than death, what’s the problem with that? Oh, I know. It’s completely different. The sweatshop operators only lock you in your factory, refuse to pay for overtime wages, run mandatory pregnancy tests, beat people up and other stuff that I know libertarians just LOVE for Americans. But these are brown people, so fuck ‘em, right?
Citations:
CafePress uses Hanes. Read here and here and here.
Thanks, all, for reinforcing the reputation of Ron Paul supporters as people who don’t really give a shit about taking advantage of people weaker than them. Especially funny little brown people who will never vote for you! Good job! Keep it up!
Oh, right, John Howard. It’s all a big conspiracy for the Ron Paul campaign to make money off of shirts that are of dubious ethics. I bet a Hillary Clinton staffer snuck in in the middle of the night and made the Ron Paul campaign do this. Yeah! Right before covering up the 9/11 conspiracy. Uh huh. Keep it up.
J: Gee, I wonder if he ever rode in a car made outside of this country? O.K. For a minute I’ll try to assume that this is serious and not just an attempt to find someway(ANYWAY) to critize Dr. Paul. First I don’t think the Paul campaign makes a profit off of these items. Second I agree with TJ in the grand plan of the Presidential election this isn’t a big deal. People shouldn’t allow the search for the perfect candidate to be the enemy of supporting the beat candidate out there. No candidate measures up to Dr. Paul when it comes to his commitment for a smaller goverment or his support of the Constitution. He understands that the war in Iraq is a mistake. He is opposed to the Patriot Act and belives that we don’t need to give up liberty to get security. I’m proud to say that I support him. Yes, I understand that he and the other members of his campaign are human and like all humans they are going to make mistakes.
Of course, you know that the people who make Toyota and Honda cars aren’t working in sweatshops, Bob, so it’s not analogous. A cursory review shows that the overseas apparel industry is rife with abuses.
Alan Augustson is a Green Party presidential candidate. He has a CafePress shop. He doesn’t sell overseas shirts with dubious ethics. He made an affirmative choice in that regard. But, right, Ron Paul is just too busy.
Choices can be made.
Choices are telling.
Now Ron Paul has a choice. He can stop offering those shirts, or he can continue on and pretend he doesn’t know, or he can make it clear to Americans that he just doesn’t give a shit about how workers are treated if they aren’t American.
John Edwards has a campaign shop. He’s a busy man. He cared enough to make sure that all the items were made ethically in the USA by American workers who don’t get paid abysmal wages. He had enough time in the day, Bob. Why didn’t Ron Paul?
Lying about and distorting your opponent’s position is the keystone of the debate cheats’ technique. In Logic 101, it is called the “straw man” argument.
Employers are not holding a gun to the heads of voluntary employees. They are offering a better alternative than otherwise exists. This is not “slave labor” (a favorite and sadistic lie told by Marxists, who generally have no jobs to offer).
Ron Paul supporters are the only ones who have used the phrase “slave labor” here… so I think you’re projecting when it comes to the “straw man” argument.
John Edwards and Alan Augustson care enough about the people who make their campaign gear to ensure that the people who do so are compensated well. I guess it just isn’t that important to Ron Paul, or his supporters either. I’m sure he has his reasons, nice, wealthy, comfortable man that he is.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Smearing libertarians as racist because they don’t buy your dishonest Marsist rhetoric is pathetic. People in foreign countries do indeed suffer from bad circumstances, but it is highly doubtful that depriving them of the jobs they VOLUNTARILY want to take is a cure for their miseries.
The we-hate-employers gasbags from the American labor union gallery are perfectly happy to stop poor people from taking the jobs they want. It feels so good to sit in America, provide no jobs, and pound away on your keyboard with warmed over Marxist labor-union rhetoric from the 1930s.
The “slave labor” rhetoric came from the article I was refered to. So I did not introduce the nonsense. I reponded to it.
Again I don’t think the Paul campaign makes a profit off of the items sold, I suspect that the Edwards campaign does make a profit.
Ron Paul wants to cut the size of goverment and your taxes. John Edwards wants to increase the size of government and your taxes. Why doesn’t John Edwards care as much as Ron Paul about cutting your taxes? John Edwards is in the pocket of the trial lawyers. We can both play this game all night, the real bottom line is we support different candidates for President and right know you think you’ve found a club to use against mine. I’ll give you some free advice if this is the best you can come up with you’re in trouble.
“Buy American” hardly shows concern for all those poor little brown foreign employees. What is it with you Marxists? Is it that voluntary foreign workers are ‘stealing’ your jobs, or is it that voluntary foreign workers are being stolen from by those (gag, vomit) horrible American employers that you wish would employ you?
Face it, you don’t care about anything except government coercion (and jobs) in your favor. Ron Paul opposes the use of force and celebrates free choice and it just isn’t convenient for you.
Thanks for the explanations about why Ron Paul doesn’t care about who produces the campaign gear for him, and under what conditions. A man with his privilege surely has had enough time to think up some really good reasons for that. You’ve helped me understand where he’s coming from very, very, very well.
And everyone who disagrees with you is a “Marxist” too. Wow! There really is a Red Menace all around us! The Republican Party is right! I’d better go turn myself in, after I finish updating my small business forms.
How very cultish.
Jim, I understand your admirable passion to fight against sweatshops in this world. Nobody here likes the idea of it. But Ron Paul (as good a candidate I’ve seen in years) is not perfect…and according to you logic is still some 3-4 degrees separated from this issue. Your claim is not ironclad to begin with:
“I’m not saying that CafePress is having its new Junior Jersey Tee Shirt or its new Maternity Shirt made in a Sweatshop. I don’t know. What I am saying is that CafePress doesn’t want to tell the public who makes its shirts, and that makes me suspicious.”
You’re suspicious…and that’s fine. But for God sakes, if you’re gonna tarnish a man’s reputation on his lack of conscience via your suspicion, shouldn’t you perhaps go after an issue with a bit more substance and worldly impact? I do not want to diminish the human suffering that occurs in sweatshops, but I think the comments made by Bob above sum this situation up nicely. Goodness, there’s a bevy of super-troubling issues with the other candidates: have you written about that? As much as I’d hate to admit it, sweatshops isn’t on the top ten issues list on American voter’s minds.
No one here likes the idea of sweatshops? Oh, I don’t think that’s the case. Go ahead and look above at some of the comments. It seems pretty clear to me that some Ron Paul supporters really like the idea of him selling shirts made in sweatshops.
Also, Jeffrey, that quote from the article (the one that begins “I’m not saying that Cafepress is…”) only refers to some of the shirts where the CafePress internal brand is not yet clearly sourced. Other shirts that Ron Paul is selling are clearly from companies that use sweatshop labor and outsourced American jobs.
Pay attention to the details, Jeffrey. It’s Ron Paul who is tarnishing his own reputation.
Jeffrey Bubb,
Thanks for your sentiments. That comment of mine you referenced was regarding — as J. Clifford just noted — the Junior Jersey Tee Shirt, which CafePress is still hiding the sourcing of as a secret. My comment applies to that shirt.
But we know perfectly well about the track record of Hanes, for instance, when it comes to overseas apparel production. We know perfectly well that it is not a good history. Ron Paul sells Hanes shirts. That’s why I agree with J. Clifford, who wrote this article.
Perhaps Ron Paul didn’t pay attention, you say. That’s an interesting supposition, and I wonder about it given that this has been a classic question for campaigns at the local, state and national level for years. Ron Paul’s a campaign veteran many times over, so if he hadn’t taken care on this issue and just let it slip, that might be a question of competence for his campaign to iron out in the next staff meeting.
The question to my mind is this: what is Ron Paul going to do after that next staff meeting?
If the Ron Paul campaign, after its next staff meeting, either chooses to explain why it thinks its shirts are ethically made, or removes the shirts of dubious ethical origins, then I promise you to high, er, um. Darn it, I’m not religious. OK, I really, really, really promise, with extra nuts, to write an article covering it. If he removes the shirts of dubious ethical origins, then I promise to praise his change of either heart or attention in an article specially devoted to that praise. But if he just toots on his merry campaign way without attention to this matter, as he has done to date, then that will say a whole lot about Ron Paul’s priorities.
I’ve said before that I feel differently about the entire package of Ron Paul’s politics than J. Clifford. I’m more sympathetic generally to Ron Paul than J. Clifford is, although I agree with most of J. Clifford’s criticisms of Ron Paul, too. We here at Irregular Times don’t have a problem disagreeing with each other. It’s not a team sport kind of thing. I’m writing this to tell you that my problem with Ron Paul’s sourcing choices is not a consequence of his policy platform (although what he chooses to do now is indicative of his priorities). Check out this one of the many articles we’ve written at Irregular Times excoriating Democratic Underground, swear words included, for their hypocrisy on sweatshop issues.
If you’re a Ron Paul supporter and you just don’t give a flying fuck about people who work in sweatshops overseas, well, there’s not much I can say to you except that I hope you never end up on the short end of that stick.
My guess is that there are a lot of Ron Paul supporters, and potential Ron Paul supporters, who DO give a flying fuck about how people are treated in factories. If you’re in that camp, ask Ron Paul to take those shirts down, or at the very least to explain himself. Like J. Clifford says, he’s only hurting himself right now.
Jeffery Bubb’s troubling comment:
“shouldn’t you perhaps go after an issue with a bit more substance and worldly impact?”
What could possibly have more substance? American Idol? Paris Hilton? I can’t think of anything more serious than work. I can’t think of anything more troubling than what people have to do to survive. I can’t think of anything more disgusting than the Americans who put foreign children in a position where they can’t go to school but instead must work in impossible sweatshop conditions just so they can make an extra buck on a t-shirt.
Sure, the kids are lucky to have any jobs at all and bring money home to their families, and sure they have the choice of dying instead and letting their families die, but can’t a presidential candidate of Ron Paul’s caliber do better than that?
Ron Paul is not a first tier candidate and he will not be president. But he CAN make a difference in the world just by the way he runs his campaign. Talk is cheap, paying lip service to ideals is easy, but actions tell what the candidate is really about. The choice of t-shirts is a small thing, easily decided and delegated at a staff meeting, but I can’t think of anything that would have more substance and more worldly impact.
Wow uh, I think one is free to support Ron Paul with any T-shirt he or she thinks will help get the word out. I personally didn’t order off cafepress because the shirts are a little too droll for the incredibly sexy message IMO. I personally recommend http://www.ronpaul1787.com because the shirts there are classy (liberty is classy), sexy (liberty is sexy), and bright red. They draw attention to our beloved constitution, and the only Champion of it running. Support Paul by donating additional funds to the campaign before June 30th, Saturday. Liberty needs it.
haha… this is funny.
It amuses me that this is the best you guys can do to sling mud at the guy. As if this were big news or some kind of disqualifier. Gimme a break. Using the free tools already out there = good business sense for someone without the retarded corporate donors of Billary / Obama. Get a life folks.
Good work, English and bret. You’ve helped me understand Ron Paul’s base well: people who don’t really think how workers are treated matters. This will surely go over well, considering that there are really not that many people who work any more these days. Keep it up!
Clearly words are more important than actions to the Ron Paul groupies. They probably wouldn’t care if he was driving his girlfriend to the abortion clinic as long as he was trying to make abortion illegal for other people. It’s okay to TALK about protecting the jobs of American workers as long you don’t actually DO anything about it.
And I don’t see any sourcing info for that “sexy” red shirt that is supposed to “support liberty”. I bet it’s made half way around the world by little brown children who should be in school. But we know those children locked in sweatshops to labor for our “sexy” t-shirts don’t need special protection. That would infringe on our “liberty”. Special protection is for fertilized ovum.
I use to have compassion for individuals who were “brainwashed” by the likes of “Rudi McRomney” and cousin “Freddie”… However, now I can only feel sorry for them..
Leadership is Action Through *Example Not Position…
(It is not a position of power nor being in the right place at the right time, neither define leadership).
It is defined by setting the example through taking action on such Leadership Traits as Truthfulness! Honesty! Fidelity!
Ron Paul Has Acted Admirably On All These Leadership Traits:
“Truthfulness†first and foremost… Then: Principle, Integrity, Honesty,* Fidelity (to their oaths), Honor, Virtue, Compassion, Courage, Vision, Wisdom and Faith.
http://leadership2008.bravehost.com
O – kay, Joel. So will Ron Paul engage in Leadership by taking Action through Example by at least explaining his actions in regards to his sourcing choices?
I’ve noticed that these Ron Paul supporters often respond to a substantive criticism by just stating how much they like Ron Paul. It’s odd, and a bit scary.
Again, let me state that I do not want to downplay the intolerance I have toward sweatshops.
I understand your concerns…much as I understand the multitudes of concerning issues by a multitude of other activist. The thing that strikes me, however, is your persistance to write-off what might be one of the best presidential candidates this country has seen in some time simply because of the connection you make with him, as a person, and this sweatshop issue. You tend to lay all your political eggs in this one basket and, by golly, if Ron Paul doesn’t rectify this problem, every other great position he takes to his candidacy is useless.
With that head-scratcher aside, I’d like to make a deal with you. Because I believe so highly of Dr. Paul, and to show you that not all of his supporters are mindless bags of hot air, you tell me what sources Ron Paul ought to use for for his t-shirts, and I’ll write, call…whatever it takes, directly to his website and suggest they change who they deal with. I am assuming you and your contingent have already attempted this…right?
So, do we have a deal?
Here is a short piece I wrote a few weeks ago when CafePress–the same internet fulfillment company that Dr. Paul uses for t-shirts on his official website–modified their product offerings.
http://camelsnose.wordpress.com/2007/06/07/cafepress-changes-to-non-fair-trade-product-jr-baby-doll-tees-removed/
I only offer ethically produced tees on my blog, and when Cafepress changed their products, I deleted the products that could not be documented as being sweatshop-free. I am indebted to Jim for the extensive research he has done on this issue.
CafePress still offers organic, fitted, hoodie, raglan, tank top and dog t-shirts from American Apparel that are ethically produced in the U.S.
Jeffrey, I can’t speak for any of the other writers at Irregular Times, but I do not just write off Ron Paul because of one issue. I write him off because his ideological obsessions combine in strange and dangerous ways on many issues.
As for your “deal”, I don’t see an actual deal that you’ve proposed. If Ron Paul is willing to stop promoting his campaign through the use of sweatshop labor and the outsourcing of American jobs using the same international trade agreements he says are betrayals of American sovereignty, of course I’ll write about that. Still, I think his willingness to do it in the first place, until publicly shamed, is pretty telling.
Cool, I was wondering where I could buy one of these T-shrits.
I am going to buy one right now
I don’t know. Looking at how ineffectual progressives are at anything, I wondered why I even read this far.
As opposed to the Libertarian Party…
Exactly, which makes me wonder why progs spend so much of their time gong after libertarians. Neo-cons get the progs all hot an bothered, but trot out a libertarian and then the smoke comes out their ears.
How many Ron Paul supporters are going to switch because some whiny prog made up some stuff? And how my whiney progs are going to get off their “But! But!” and actually -do- something in the world just because someone called their BS?
Seriously, even if Ron Paul shirts are as bad as this writer claims, and everyone of the 20 or so people who read this blog stop buying those shirts, does that mean that Hanes is going to quit their alleged sweatshop practices? The cold light of truth has been on them for all this time, and yet they persist.
This blog, my posts, and all the rest are what are affectionately known as a Wankerteria.
I’ve never really thought of jclifford as a “whiny prog”. He’s got that chin dimple and he’s got that sugarbear voice goin on, and he really is quite hot.
I rather doubt that Ron Paul’s entourage is going to change their buying practices to match their “ideology” if greed can be called an ideology. They’re the type who would have supported slavery back when that was fashionable. At least their bizarre comments are good for providing some amusement.
Yes, you can change sweatshop practices. First you start with information, then you examine your own buying and selling habits and change them to fit who you are and who you want to be. When you start putting ethical decisions into your life, you can start feeling good.
“When you start putting ethical decisions into your life, you can start feeling good.”
Then you should try it. Accusing people of supporting slavery when you have no proof doesn’t seem very ethical to me.
Give a little read to the well-turned essay by William K. Clifford(!) called, “The Ethics of Belief,” available for your inspection here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/w_k_clifford/ethics_of_belief.html
A pertinent passage:
There was once an island in which some of the inhabitants professed a religion teaching neither the doctrine of original sin nor that of eternal punishment. A suspicion got abroad that the professors of this religion had made use of unfair means to get their doctrines taught to children. They were accused of wresting the laws of their country in such a way as to remove children from the care of their natural and legal guardians; and even of stealing them away and keeping them concealed from their friends and relations. A certain number of men formed themselves into a society for the purpose of agitating the public about this matter. They published grave accusations against against individual citizens of the highest position and character, and did all in their power to injure these citizens in their exercise of their professions. So great was the noise they made, that a Commission was appointed to investigate the facts; but after the Commission had carefully inquired into all the evidence that could be got, it appeared that the accused were innocent. Not only had they been accused of insufficient evidence, but the evidence of their innocence was such as the agitators might easily have obtained, if they had attempted a fair inquiry. After these disclosures the inhabitants of that country looked upon the members of the agitating society, not only as persons whose judgment was to be distrusted, but also as no longer to be counted honourable men. For although they had sincerely and conscientiously believed in the charges they had made, -yet they had no right to believe on such evidence as was before them-. Their sincere convictions, instead of being honestly earned by patient inquiring, were stolen by listening to the voice of prejudice and passion.
STT, read the above thread, go look at the merchandise offered on the official Ron Paul website, and then point out for me even one Ron Paul supporter who cares how workers are treated.
How do you know that the Hanes shirts in question were made the way you claim?
Here’s an interesting report from the National Labor Committee itself. Please take a look at the actions Hanes took when they became aware of the human rights violations at a factory called Harvest Rich.
http://www.nlcnet.org/admin/media/document/ReportPDF/Harvest_Rich/Train_Wreck.pdf
Here are some very telling paragraphs from the NLC report (sorry for the bad formatting, please refer to the original article to read it more clearly):
A Hanes spokesperson later told the media that this late night visit was their “first clue†of the serious violations at the factory. “We had audits that did not catch some of the excessive working hours, did not catch some of the double books,†said the Hanes representative,
continuing, “Our first clue to the double books issue was making a midnight visit to the plant and finding about 50 employees who were still working.†(Women’s Wear Daily, December 7, 2006). To their credit, Hanes then carried out the most serious and thorough corporate audit to
date at the Harvest Rich factory. Their findings were clear. Hanes found that “Harvest Rich management intentionally concealed workplace practices,†including “deliberately keeping inaccurate records to conceal excessive working hours for employees and delayed overtime payments to employees.†(That is a corporate euphemism meaning workers were cheated of the legal overtime wages due them.) Harvest Rich management had schemed to undermine Hanes monitoring through, “intentional deception during past audit proceedings.†A Hanes representative also informed the NLC that they had uncovered health and safety violations and unpaid benefits and had “serious issues†regarding the attitude and behavior of Harvest Rich’s general manager, Ratan Roy. (This is another euphemism referring to Mr. Roy’s abusive
treatment of the workers, including beatings and threats.)
The violations were so extreme that Hanes pulled their work from the Harvest Rich factory in mid-stream. It was during the November investigation that “the gravity of the violations began to surface.†Chris Fox, vice president of corporate responsibility for Hanesbrands, told the press:
“It was the totality of the pay and overtime violations, health and safety violations and our concerns about management’s willingness and ability to fix the problems, which led us to pull our business.†(Winston-Salem Journal, Wednesday, December 6, 2006) Hanes took one step further, acknowledging that their prior corporate monitoring efforts at the Harvest Rich factory were overly naive and as a result a terrible failure. Hanes released a statement saying, “The company also is working with WRAP and other auditing agencies to further enhance auditing practices…†It was not only Hanes, it was the U.S. apparel industry’s
Worldwide Responsible Apparel Production (WRAP) monitoring agency which also failed miserably. (“Hanesbrands Inc. Investigation of Harvest Rich Operations,†December 5, 2006)
—
Even the NLC uses the words, “to their credit” when referring to Hanes’ actions.
But from you and jclifford we are to believe that even though Hanes lost money pulling their production from this factory as soon as they had discovered for themselves how it was run, Ron Raul should be pilloried for using a printing company that uses Hanes products.
Please allow me to requote from the W.T. Clifford essay above:
Not only had they been accused of insufficient evidence, but the evidence of their innocence was such as the agitators might easily have obtained, if they had attempted a fair inquiry.
—
When will you and jc -attempt a fair inquiry- into the workings of the Ron Paul supporters regarding shirts printed on Hanes stock? You claim that a Ron Paul staffer could easily have found out that Hanes was evil and quit using their shirts. Perhaps a Ron Paul staffer did look into Hanes, found the NLC article and decided that Hanes was making efforts to clean up their act, and, not knowing exactly which factory the shirts came from, did not want to “carpet bomb” all the Hanes employees and contractors for the actions of some.
You and jc, in your zealotry, want us to punish everyone for the sins of a few.
Gotta love that moral reasoning.
Should you guys be considered the intellectual leaders of the Progressive movement?
Something interesting from the NLC article is that the workers at Harvest Rich said that they saw no one from any outside organization who might have helped them.
So where were the Progressives? The international unionists? Not a single person who claims to care about the rights of workers did anything about the abuses at the factory until the NLC and ITV 4 went there in October of 2006. What were all the worker’s rights people doing in the meantime?
Now be careful, because every excuse you make for your side can be used by Hanes and the Ron Paul organization.
Ok, now you can start.