When I posed the question, "are we utopian or realist?" I meant that
soultions to child labor (or slavery) are limited under capitalism. The
problems of child labor and others are emanating from the contradictory
nature of the system. Unless you eliminate those contradictions you
cannot solve the problems. You could try to improve over what already
exist through liberal reforms. That is exactly what some liberal
governments try to do. By all means, they are not eradicating the
root causes.
Fikret Ceyhun
On Tue, 27 Jun 1995, Anthony D'Costa wrote:
> In the precapitalist world children worked and did not get education.
> The question is were they exploited in the same way as today? Besides,
> urging human rights in an underdeveloped economy, without commitment,
> without administrative capacity, and with limited resources only becomes
> rhetoric with little practical substance.
>
> What might be a realistic solution? Assuming that the liberal west would
> most openly support human rights then by creating export dependency
> (which they already are in the case of carpets) of child-products
> boycotts by western consumers might drive home the message. Some effect
> of this has been felt by German pressure on India and government
> sponsored manufacture of carpets are "childlabor free" not so yet for
> private producers. The problem with this is that it is effective for the
> export but may do little for doemstic markets. As long as purchasing
> power is low with maldistribution of wealth, domestic market will
> continue to support chile labor. Past Chinese strategy might be useful
> but very difficult to adopt in hetergeneous, polyglot societies.
>
> Anthony D'Costa
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 1995, Fikret Ceyhun wrote:
>
> > 27 June 1995
> >
> > My answer lies in the second sentence of my mesage. Namely, we
> > are talking workers' rights in less developed countries, where adult
> > workers are unable to gain their just right legally and if they gain
> > legally, they are unable to implement them in practice. "De facto"
> > situation is much different than "de jure." When it is difficult for
> > adults, it is much more difficult for child workers, who cannot defend
> > their rights as efficient and skilfully as adults.
> >
> > I am asked for a solution to a difficult question.There isn't one
> > that can be implemented, because of the collusion between the employers
> > and the governments. Frequently they are the same people.Child labor is
> > inhuman whether it is legal or not. A chile in the field or in factory is
> > a child whose education is denied. Educationally deprived child is a
> > child lost. This vicious cycle of child exploitation must end so that
> > they can't be exploited when they become adult. There must be a law
> > (enforceable law) against child labor (anyone less than 14, 15, or 16
> > years old), and compulsory public education with government subsidy. If
> > you can implement this, you will immensely improve children's future
> > economic lot.
> >
> > In struggle,
> > Fikret Ceyhun
> > Economics Dept.
> > Univ. of North Dakota
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 26 Jun 1995 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Fikret Ceyhun says:
> > >
> > > The argument to legalize child labor with all the rights that their adult
> > > counterparts have will not end the child exploitation, but will further
> > > it.
> > > ___________
> > > How?
> > > ___________
> > > In a world that adult laborers are unable to defend and protect
> > > their just rights against business, how can we expect that from the
> > > children? Are we utopian or realist?
> > > _________
> > > But they have been defending and protecting it much better than the children
> > > have been. What would be your realist solution?
> > >
> > > Cheers, ajit sinha
> > >
> >
>
