snake321 wrote:
I'm against slavery, period. First we enslave the native americans, then we enslave the blacks, now we're enslaving Chinese. What's the difference?
I mean yeah, the Chinese do technically have a choice, a choice to be slaves or starve to death. That's really not much of a choice though. Slavery is just wrong, we need to find a better way of producing our own goods.
This demeans every person that actually was enslaved in the slave trade. It also misses the point of the actual forced labor that goes on in China, which is rather irregular, but does still does occur. It is not however
Americans who are doing the enslaving of Chinese prisoners but the Chinese communist party leadership. The question is whether or not America is make that problem worse or better, and the morality of trading with such a regime (this assumes the objection is not against free trade generally).
A legitimate argument can be made regarding trade with China. I myself opposed most favored nation status with China (although I feel the consequences of revoking it would negate the benefits). However, it must be noted, that China before free trade was in far more dilapidated condition then it was now. It was essentially a nation of labor camps before the economic (rather then political) reforms of Deng Xiaoping, and his successors. Since then, especially along the coastline, China has experienced a economic surge that has allowed a middle class to develop. These reforms (forced labor not being a reform), which have included selling off state owned properties, have been denounced by many on the far-left as "capitalist" and ruining the "classless society" and the "benefits" of socialism that Mao-Tse Tung had created (although China maintains much of it's socialist centralist structure, and only recently added property rights to it's constitution), are precisely what has brought China out of the stark poverty it used to maintain.
American corporations like Nike and Wal-Mart employ slave labor to obtain their goods.