Sweatshop as saviors

Sweltering rooms packed with young women manufacturing merchandise for American consumption -- this has become a symbol of the wrongdoings committed by multinational corporations. At this campus and many others across this country, it has become an accepted truth that wealthy nations and corporations exploit cheap labor in other countries. After moving factories to developing nations, corporations often pay their new workers a tiny fraction of what their American or "first-world" counterparts had earned. It seems to be a rotten deal for everyone…except the corporation and their stockholders. \nTo idealists, myself included, this seems to be an intolerable injustice. While some are concerned about the loss of quality, blue-collar jobs in the United States, many more people are preoccupied with the poor working conditions in sweatshops abroad. It's no wonder people turn out in thousands to protest the symbols of these wrongs, like the World Trade Organization. It seems to be a cause worth supporting. I used to think so, too, but I have begun to question my own convictions. \nIn a recent series of articles, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof has traveled through Cambodia to explore the poverty existing there. In particular, he has documented the tragedies associated with the sex trade where young girls are kidnapped or sold into virtual slavery. They are bought and sold and subjected to physical punishment and threats. In time, many will fall victim to AIDS. \nIn 1998, a report by the United Nations estimated there were more than 35,000 victims of the sex trade in Cambodia. Of this number, more than one-third were thought to be under the age of seventeen. The same study estimated the industry generated $11 to $13 billion in nearby Thailand, a sum that would fund the country's government budget for half a year. It's not a small, or isolated problem -- multinational corporations do not have a monopoly on injustice. \nAs miserable as the work may be, factory jobs represent a considerable improvement over the inhuman and dangerous alternatives in the sex trade. And if there is a ray of hope in this otherwise gloomy discussion, recent history offers examples of countries that quickly progressed beyond sweatshops. Half a century ago, both Japan and South Korea relied on factories where conditions were not much better for workers. Today, their workers are among the most comfortable in the world. \nIf our well-intended demands were to be met, and companies were required to offer a comparable wage, many would simply refuse to locate in countries like Thailand or Cambodia. Instead of opening new work opportunities, young women and girls might be forced into one of the only other occupations available to them. Before arguing sweatshops are irredeemably evil, it's important to remember the number of options available for women in undeveloped or transitional countries can be very limited. It's an odd argument for an idealist to make, but these factories may be the best option at the moment. \n In order to be honest about this debate, I think we need to remember the women choose to work in sweatshops for a reason. In a country where AIDS is on the rise, escaping the sex trade is a matter of life and death.\nMultinational corporations must be held accountable for the way they treat their workers and the environment abroad. We should demand they offer safe work areas and maintain reasonable protections for the environment. But to condemn all multinational development abroad ignores the plight of many. People who care about this issue need to reframe their approach -- it's not a question of whether or not multinationals bring development, it's how they bring it. \nKristof's series on Cambodia is scheduled to continue in today's New York Times.