Episode 41 - Exclusion, Privilege, and Ethical Consumption

This episode we interviewed Brianna Scrimshaw Botchwey. Brianna is an aspiring zero waster and PhD candidate at the University of Toronto. Her research focuses on sustainable development and foreign aid. The research note below includes preparatory notes from Kristen and Brianna.

Kristen’s Notes

Brianna, we’re so excited to have you on the show to talk about exclusion and privilege in ethical consumption. We’re going to focus on fashion, but this is a question that impacts any kind of ethical consumption in different ways.

Brianna, I know this is something you think about a lot, and it was your idea to have an episode on this. So, can you maybe describe for the listener what you mean by privilege and exclusion in ethical consumption?

In our series on fast fashion, we talked about the components to building a conscious closet (which we took from the wonderful book by Elizabeth Cline, The Conscious Closet).

The advice is basically to avoid fast fashion as much as you can by thinking about your closet as a wardrobe that you build over time.

As part of that, there are basically three categories for how to shop for clothing as an ethical consumer: (1) when you have to go fast fashion choose Better Big Brands, which are the big brands that are doing better than their peers; (2) look for Conscious Superstars, which are slow fashion brands that really focus on human rights and sustainability; and (3) go for new-to-you second-hand clothing through thrifting, renting, swapping and borrowing. 

I think what I want to do with this episode is to talk about some of the barriers to inclusivity with each of these three approaches. But first let’s have a more general discussion about the kinds of barriers that we might encounter in all three areas:

Barriers to Building a Conscious Closet

What do you think are some of the big barriers that people face in trying to get to a more conscious wardrobe?

• Cost

• Sizing

• Marketing

• Race

• Time

Better Big Brands and Problems with Inclusive Sizing

Brianna, you shared a video about Lululemon on your Instagram feed a while ago, and I thought it was a good way to open up this discussion.

A consultancy firm called Simon-Kucher and Partners surveyed consumers about the considerations for conscious fashion. The four top-rated considerations were (1) fair labour standards, (2) sustainable materials and processes, (3) sending profits to charity, and (4) body positivity.

Have you observed a change?

I was listening to an interview with body positivity writer and photographer Marielle Elizabeth, and she talked about the reasons that clothing companies have been so slow to adopt inclusive sizing.[1] She says basically that until about five years ago the main barrier was fat-phobia and these harmful narratives that stem from it – like the (totally incorrect) idea that larger people don’t spend as much on clothing because they are trying to lose weight.[2]

But in the last five years these fat-phobic narratives are being smashed, so now it’s more about the financial investment. Because there is an initial cost to introducing inclusive sizing, especially if you’re going to be increasing beyond size 18. She made an interesting point that beyond size 18 you basically have to re-think how you design clothing because it’s not just a 1:1 size increase everywhere.[3]

I was listening to an interview with Alexandra Waldman, a co-founder of Universal Standard (an inclusive fashion brand that produces sizes 0 to 40), and she talked about not being able to find a quality white t-shirt that didn’t have a cat or flowers on it.

Sustainable Fashion Superstars Inclusive Sizing

Inclusive sizing actually just makes a lot of business sense. The sizes most frequently sold in stores are 14-18, so having those sizes available allows you to sell to people in that category.

From what I’ve seen, sizing inclusivity generally means having sizes to at least 24. A number of slow fashion brands have introduced inclusive sizing (or had it to begin with). Similarly, inclusive fashion brands are increasing their sustainability. From what I was able to see, most slow fashion brands have made nods to sustainability and also use some level of inclusive sizing. 

Power of My People: an ethical fashion company based out of B.C. They are a slow fashion company and I found their approach convincing – they seem to have thought about workers’ rights and environmental sustainability in how they supply and manufacture garments. On their website they describe where the fabrics were sourced and where manufacturing occurred for each item, as well as any ethical certifications. They have a new net zero emissions target that they are meeting with carbon offsets. For that reason, their products are on the pricier side. But I’m working on trying to buy a smaller number of staple items to build my wardrobe – conscious closet episode – so I don’t mind. I bought a linen button down from them a while back and really enjoy it. Power of My People sizes to 3XL and they have plus-sized models showing their items.

Girlfriend Collective: I have three pairs of leggings and two sports bras from this brand. I bought them in 2018 and 2019 and they are all still going strong after probably 50-150 wears. They have a Good On You rating of “Great”, which is based on a 4/5 rating for the environment and a 5/5 rating for human rights. They have a lot of detail on their website about how they source the water bottles and fish nets they recycle for the fabric, as well as the working conditions for the people that make their clothes. Girlfriend Collective uses diverse models and has sizing up to 6XL. As for price, they are certainly not cheap – leggings go for $68 each according to my most recent search – but they are in line with other athleticwear brands.

On her website, Marielle Elizabeth publishes a list of slow fashion brands that have inclusive sizing. Check it out here.

Thrift Shopping

Brianna, you mentioned thrift shops and clothing subscriptions in the outline that you sent us. Can you tell me a bit more about what you meant?

That was something I had never thought about before. But quality consignment stores so rarely have good selection for people above a size large. Which is ridiculous because all body types have clothing that they want to get rid of.

Why do you think it is that thrift shops have such little selection in plus sizes?

There are a couple of thoughts on why the supply of plus-sized clothing in second-hand markets is so low. First, because fashion brands haven’t been selling in inclusive sizes, people with larger bodies haven’t had the same level of access to the quality pieces that consignment stores look for. There is also some fat-phobia in what consignment stores are selecting for their inventories.

Another factor is the documented impact of fatphobia on the livelihoods of people. There is evidence showing that larger women make less money, which in turn influences the amount that people have to spend on clothing – which in turn means fewer clothing donations and more demand for second-hand clothes.

When it comes to thrift shops, one writer that I encountered said the lack of plus-sized options was due to high demand – that whenever there are plus-sized clothes they go pretty quickly. She also said that there is a problem where non plus-sized people will go to thrift shops and buy plus-sized clothes with interesting patterns in order to cut them up and create new items. Apparently this is a whole thing that people do, and even blog about. So yeah, don’t be that person. There is also a trend of buying oversized clothing, which takes away from nice clothes that would fit a larger body.

It seems like there is some progress on this as entrepreneurs start to create body positive consignment and resale stores. I found a list of options in several American cities. ThredUp, the world’s largest online consignment and thrift shop, has up to 4XL on its website 

On its face, clothing swaps could be great for people who don’t see their bodies represented in thrift shops. But I think about the clothing swaps I have been a part of and how my own insecurities have sort of been at play, and I wonder whether that might not be problematic. What do you think? Is there a way around it?

Ethical Fashion and Affordability

I think class is the next most important barrier to participation in ethical fashion. I know it has been a factor for me. What about for the two of you?

Let’s dig into the reasons. So, obviously, on a one-to-one basis a shirt you buy from fast fashion is going to be cheaper than slow fashion. Lots of blogs have pointed this out. Definitely, there are ways to spend less on slow fashion than on fast fashion. Good quality clothes last longer, so to a certain extent it can make sense to buy for longer.

But the reality is it can be hard to have the liquidity to be able to afford these more expensive, long-lasting pieces.

I think there is also a question of what happens if your style or size changes. Investing a lot in a few pieces can be a good strategy, but if your size fluctuates that can make it more difficult to think about your clothes as a wardrobe. Also, lifestyle changes.

There is also a certain privilege in being able to spend the time to read about what goes into a wardrobe, to research ethical fashion brands, and to go to lots of different consignment shops. Making your own clothes is also about the luxury of time.

Potential Solutions

Size Inclusivity: Brianna, you had some really good suggestions for solutions to size inclusivity problems in the fashion industry. Mind telling us about that?

In General: For ethical consumers, I think it’s important to remember that everyone has different identities and experiences and challenges, and that the ability to make ethical consumption choices is a privilege that not everybody has the same access to. What comes with that is a duty to use your privilege to make ethical consumption easier to access. So that means asking your favourite sustainable brands to size inclusively, to produce makeup in different shades. It also means you have to help push for those more systemic solutions.

Brianna’s Notes

Aim

When people engage with ethical consumption, they often don’t realize the different kinds of privilege they may have access to. Hoping to illuminate how privilege shapes who has access to ethical consumption.

Disclaimer

Not an activist or social justice scholar, my comments are based more on my personal experience when trying to engage in ethical consumption patterns. Also acknowledging that I am on the border of straight sizing so generally can find clothes in most stores and I am a lighter skinned dark person so also can find shades in most places.

Big Questions

1. Who actually has access to ethical consumption?

2. What are the different barriers to access?

Barriers to Buying Slow/Sustainable Fashion

Cost.

Sizing: most brands only go up to size 12, or occasionally 16. Even for brands that have these bigger sizes, finding them in store is like finding vegan food in a steakhouse – Not easy.

Style: a lot of sustainable plus size clothing just isn’t trendy – like not all of us bigger folks want to wear moomoos.

Marketing: a lot of sustainable fashion appears to be marketed to white western audiences, which for me suggests that a lot of assumptions are being made about who wants sustainable fashion which obviously is not just that white western audience.

Some nice exceptions:

• Girlfriend Collective goes up to a 6XL and they use diverse models.

• Nettle’s Tale goes up to 3XL and has a community sizing guide that includes measurements from people with all body types.

• Kotn goes up to a 2XL, but not in all styles.

• Other popular brands like Patagonia also only go up to 2XL in select styles.

Barriers to Other Alternatives to Fast Fashion

Thrifting (also suffers from sizing/access issues)

Clothing subscription (again only for smaller people)

Make your own (lack of time (time is also a privilege) and upfront costs can be high)  

Barriers to Buying “Sustainable” Beauty Products

Cost.

Lack of shade range.

Lack of products for different hair types.

Only sold online a lot of the time.

Examples of people trying to do better: Range Beauty is a black owned company trying to offer clean beauty for all shades. Cheekbone beauty is an indigenous owned company.  

Potential Solutions

Plus-size-only second-hand shopping.

Made to order sizing: some sustainable brands have this option where you can submit your measurements (examples: Pamut Apparel US).

Pressuring brands to be inclusive: Whenever a brand does a survey ALWAYS encourage them to increase sizing/inclusivity in product/marketing. When you are writing a review also consider talking about inclusivity.

What is NOT a solution is telling people who face these barriers that they just shouldn’t consume. It’s one thing to decide not to consume at all (which can be a valid choice) but it’s another thing not to have the choice at all because of structural factors beyond your control.

The onus for sustainable consumption is partially on the individual, but brands and suppliers also need to make sure they are inclusive so that everyone can have access to ethical consumption.

Resources

 https://www.stephanieyeboah.com/2020/03/navigating-sustainability-when-youre-plus-size.html 

https://fashionjournal.com.au/fashion/the-sustainable-fashion-industry-is-size-exclusive-take-it-from-this-model/

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/designers/a32213676/plus-size-sustainable-fashion/

https://wellinsiders.com/defining-diversity-inclusivity-in-green-beauty/

Endnotes

[1] Medium Well Podcast. (23 September 2020). Creative a More Size-Inclusive Ethical Fashion Landscape and Fat Activism with Marielle Elizabeth. Medium Well Podcast.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

Episodes 36 and 37 - Forced Labour

For Labour Day, we wanted to highlight the conditon of workers who aren’t protected by modern labour laws and labour unions. Given its prevalence throughout the world, we chose to examine the cross-cutting theme of forced labour.

We brought back Alexandra Sundarsingh for Part One, to bring historical context. Lex is a second year PhD student in the department of history at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She has a BA and MA from the University of Toronto. Thematically, her research interests include the history of Indian indenture, and its intersections with labor, race, gender, diasporic Indian culture, colonialism, and empire. Geographically, she focuses on how South Asia and the Indian Ocean world connect to broader global histories of migration, labor, and culture. She approaches these topics mainly through legal documentation and debates, transportation and labor infrastructure, and print culture in the Indian Ocean British colonies between 1840 and 1920. She also has an ongoing love of and interest in food history and hopes to be able to use this in her research as well. Check out her work here!
Lex recommended another book for this episode: We, the Survivors by Tash Aw

 Excerpt from Amnesty International’s “Turning People into Profits” (p.7):

When Suresh, aged 39, first considered leaving his village in Saptari district for a foreign job, he hoped it might be a life-changing experience that would set him and his family up for a more secure financial future. His first step was to contact an agent in his village who knew about job opportunities abroad. The agent had good news. He could offer him work in a Malaysian glove making factory. Pay would be relatively high, at RM 1800 (USD 420) per month, and conditions would be good, with one day off every week, safe working conditions and clean accommodation. Ultimately, the agent said, this would give Suresh the chance to save enough money to buy land for his family.

But this chance would cost: Suresh had to pay the village agent, as well as the Kathmandu recruitment agency who would finalise the deal, upfront. To get his job, Suresh borrowed NPR 250,000 (USD 2,416) from a local moneylender, at an annual interest rate of 36%. Although the recruitment fee was enormous (and illegal), Suresh’s agent and the Kathmandu agency assured him that he would be able to quickly pay off the debt once he started earning in Malaysia. The reality was very different. At the glove making factory, Suresh was unpaid for months on end, and when he was paid, his employer made a number of unexplained deductions from his salary. Suresh could not leave and get a new job, because his passport had been taken away, and his employer refused to end his contract or even allow him to leave the factory. In desperation, Suresh turned to his recruitment agency for help. They did not return his calls.

Instead of making money, when Suresh finally returned to Nepal in 2015 he had accumulated a staggering debt of NPR 550,000 (USD 5,317).[1]

What is forced labour?

Forced labour is a form of modern slavery. It includes slavery, practices similar to slavery, and bonded labour/debt bondage. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), forced labour is: “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily”. The ILO definition includes two core elements.

First, labour must be extracted under the menace of any penalty. The penalty can be penal sanctions or a loss of rights and privileges. In its most extreme form, the menace of a penalty can involve physical violence or restraint. But other, more subtle, forms of penalty exist as well. Sometimes that might mean denouncing victims to the police or immigration authorities. Penalties can be financial, as in the case of debt-bondage and wage theft. In other cases, people may have their documents confiscated.

Second the work must be of an involuntary nature. For this criterion, the ILO looks at things like the method and content of consent, any external constraints or indirect coercion, and whether it is possible to revoke freely given consent. It is often the case that victims enter forced labour situations initially of their own accord and discover later that they are not free to withdraw their labour. (FYI, the ILO definition excludes prison work.)

Debt bondage is a particularly prominent feature of forced labour in current-day contexts. Half of forced labour imposed by private actors included debt bondage. In agriculture, domestic work, and manufacturing, debt bondage was even more prevalent – occurring in more than 70% of cases.

Forced labour is different than sub-standard or exploitative working conditions – so, even though things like low wages or unsafe working conditions are exploitative and bad, they are not in themselves forced labour.

There are numerous international treaties on forced labour, including: ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29); ILO Forced Labour Protocol (ratified, not yet in force); UN Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery; Palermo Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children.

How it works

This short video does a good job of showing how forced labour often happens.

There are two main phases of forced labour: recruitment and control and exploitation.

Forced labour usually involves some kind of unfree recruitment, involving deception or coercion. Coercive recruitment often involves debt bondage or confiscation of documents. It can also occur through abuse of a difficult financial situation, irregular migrant status, or a difficult family situation. Deceptive recruitment is where promises made at the time of recruitment are not fulfilled. Victims are most commonly deceived about wages, working conditions, the jobs themselves, or the length of stay.  

People in situations of forced labour work under exploitative conditions. This can include low salaries, delayed payments, imposed poor living conditions, excessive work, and lack of social protection. Victims of forced labour face coercion, which might include:

●      Threats or actual physical harm

●      Restriction of movement or confinement to the workplace or a limited area

●      Withholding wages or excessive wage reduction that violates previously made agreements

●      Retention of passports and identity documents

●      Threats of denunciation to the authorities, when the worker has an irregular immigration status

What is the scale of forced labour?

In total, about 40 million people around the world are in modern slavery. That is roughly the same as the population of Canada. Modern slavery includes forced labour and forced marriage. Forced labour makes up more than half of modern slavery. At any given time, an estimated 25 million people are victims of forced labour. For context, that’s roughly the same as the population of Australia. (15 million people were living in a forced marriage). Those estimates are from a study called the Global Estimates of Modern Slavery created in 2017 by the ILO, the Walk Free Foundation, and the International Organization for Migration.

And that’s at any given time. In the past five years, 89 million people experienced some form of modern slavery.

Somewhere between 83% and 90% of the world’s forced laborers are working for the private sector, according to one estimate. Forced labour generates annual profits of about $150 billion USD.

State-imposed forced labour

State-imposed forced labour is declining as a source of forced labour, but it does occur. At least 2.2 million people worldwide are trapped in state- or rebel-imposed forms of forced labour. This form of forced labour often occurs in prisons or in work imposed by rebel or armed forces.

You can think about child soldiers as an example of state- or rebel-imposed forced labour. In previous episodes we have also talked about the Uzbek government’s connection to forced labour in the cotton industry. And of course, forced labour in Chinese re-education camps for Uighurs has received a lot of attention recently.

Another example is North Korea’s overseas workers program. North Korea sends somewhere between 50,000 and 120,000 of its citizens to work overseas and the government receives the lion’s share of wages for these workers (70-90%). North Korean overseas workers are primarily in China and Russia, although they have been found in dozens of countries in Asia, Africa, South America, and Eastern Europe. They are employed mostly in mining, logging, textile, and construction.

The United Nations and others have documented conditions that amount to forced labour. For instance: workers do not know the details of their employment contract; they receive tasks according to their state-assigned social class; they are under constant surveillance while working abroad; and they are threatened with repatriation if they commit infractions. It is believed that the North Korean regime makes $1.2 to 2.3 billion annually from its overseas worker program.

In the second episode, Kyla talks about the Chinese prison system and Christmas Light production. It’s pretty grim, but you can follow the link to read more. She also mentions the stories that have come out in the past few years of consumers finding notes in their merchandise from people experiencing forced labour, and you can read more about that here.

Where is forced labour a problem?

Modern slavery occurs everywhere, although forced labour is most prevalent in Asia and the Pacific, where 4 out of every 1,000 people were victims. Europe and Central Asia was the region with the second highest prevalence of forced labour (3.6 per 1,000), followed by Africa (2.8 per 1,000), the Arab States (2.2 per 1,000), and the Americas (1.3 per 1,000).

Forced labour happens in a bunch of industries, especially: domestic work; construction; manufacturing; agriculture, forestry, and fishing; accommodation and food services; wholesale and trade; personal services; mining and quarrying; and begging.

Source: Global Estimates of Modern Slavery 2017, p.32

There are some regional patterns to this. In the Middle East, for instance, forced labour is most often for domestic work (270,000 out of 400,000 according to the ILO). In developed economies, forced labour is more common in other sectors like agriculture, construction, and manufacturing.

An American study created a typology of sex and labor trafficking using data from a human trafficking hotline. The typology includes 25 categories of work, many of which are related to sex. According to the US Department of Labor, the goods with the most forced labor listings (meaning number of countries listed) are: bricks, cotton, garments, cattle, and sugarcane.

Who is affected by forced labour?

More than two-thirds of modern slavery victims are women and girls (71%). It’s true that some of this is because forced labour in the commercial sex industry is overwhelmingly women and girls (99%) and because women and girls are mostly the victims of forced marriages (84%).

But even in other sectors, women and girls make up more than half (58%) of forced labour victims. There are a few sectors where males are primarily victims of forced labour: mining and quarrying; begging; construction and manufacturing; and agriculture, forestry, and fishing. On the other hand, victims are most often women in domestic work and accommodation and food services.

Victims of forced labour tend to be younger than the workforce overall. About one fifth of forced labour victims are children (18%), although state-imposed forced labour uses children less frequently (7%). 

Even though sexual exploitation is only about one-fifth of all forced labour, in terms of the number of people affected, two-thirds of profits from forced labour were generated by forced sexual exploitation. That is because sexual exploitation is the most lucrative form of forced labour, with an average annual profit per victim of $21,800 USD (compared with $4,800 in construction, $2,500 in agriculture, and $2,300 in domestic work). On the other hand, while forced labour in the agriculture, fishing, and forestry sector makes up a fairly small component of profits from forced labour, it affects quite a lot of people – approximately 3.5 million in 2014.

According to the Canadian Human Trafficking Hotline, some groups are most at-risk of forced labour. First are foreign nationals with precarious immigration status, recruitment debts, language barriers, and a lack of awareness of their rights. Second are those working in: agriculture and farming (seasonal workers, farm hands); domestic service (child/elder care and home housekeeping); hospitality (hotel housekeeping, restaurant kitchen work); construction and resource extraction (e.g., mining, timber, etc.); and services such as nail salons and commercial cleaning businesses. Third are people with vulnerabilities related to: precarious housing or homelessness, substance abuse, poverty, physical or learning disabilities, and mental health issues.

What are the causes of forced labour?

Poverty and globalization are two foundational causes of forced labour. But these are pretty broad concepts. To be a bit more specific, I want to talk about six dimensions that make people vulnerable to forced labour: restrictive migration regimes; economic vulnerability; sexism and racism; state fragility and conflict; authoritarianism; and global capitalism.

Restrictive Migration

Forced labour is closely connected to migration and, in particular, human trafficking. Almost one in every four victims of forced labour were exploited outside of their country of residence. This is especially the case for forced sexual exploitation, where three-quarters (74%) of victims were exploited outside of their country of residence. That is because there is a high degree of risk associated with migration, especially for migrant women and children.

Approximately 20% of forced labour is a result of human trafficking. Human trafficking is “the acquisition of people by improper means such as force, fraud or deception, with the aim of exploiting them.” People trafficked into forced labour are trafficked into commercial sexual exploitation (43%), economic exploitation (32%), and for mixed or undetermined reasons (25%).

Of course, it’s not just human trafficking: restrictive migration regimes can create unfreedom as well. Qatar’s successful bid to host the 2022 FIFA World Cup drew a lot of attention to the situation of migrant workers there. 95% of Qatar’s labour force consists of migrant workers, and these workers are brought in through a sponsorship system called the Kafala System. Qatar was roundly critiqued for this system, and international pressure led to changes. For instance, now workers do not require exit visas to leave the country. Although the Kafala System has been rightly criticized for how it creates the vulnerabilities that can allow for forced labour, what I found the most striking when I was reading about it is how similar it is to seasonal migrant worker programs in Canada and other wealthy countries. We mentioned COVID outbreaks among Canadian temporary workers and you can listen to more about that on this episode of Front Burner.

The ILO has a good description of how the vulnerability of migrant workers gets exploited in the construction industry in Eastern Europe, for instance:  

Migrant workers are brought illegally to work on a construction site, without knowing the working conditions or terms of payment. There, they discover that they are forced to live together in a remote place provided by the employer (to avoid police controls) and told that they will be paid only at the end of the construction. A few days before the end, when the work is done and wages are due, the owner may call a law enforcement officer to inform him of the presence of irregular migrants. The workers are then deported and the employer does not need to pay them. All due wages (minus the bribe) increase the profits made.

Economic Vulnerability

Poverty and lack of outside options are important risk factors for forced labour. In addition to poverty, people can be more vulnerable to forced labour when their family has undergone an income shock or is experiencing food insecurity.

Lower education and literacy levels can also make workers more vulnerable to forced labour. Weak labour protections create pools of unprotected workers, “who face serious barriers to acting collectively and exerting rights”. Workers can be unprotected because their country lacks robust labour protections or because they are in a category of work that is unprotected. In particular, the expansion of precarious work makes people more vulnerable to forced labour. The ILO has estimated that more than 75% of the global workforce is in temporary, informal, or unpaid work: so, “only a quarter of workers have the security of permanent contracts”.

Sexism and Racism

Some people are made more vulnerable to forced labour because some part of their identity denies them rights and full personhood. Although different, intersecting forms of discrimination play a role in forced labour, sexism is one of the most prominent dimensions.

Authoritarianism

State-imposed forced labour is largely a product of authoritarianism.

State Fragility and Conflict

On the other hand, state fragility and conflict can create opportunities for rebels and criminal organizations (and sometimes the government) to carry out illegal exploitation of workers.

Global Capitalism

Several facets of our global economy create pressure within the market for exploitable forms of labour and create spaces for exploitation. A report by openDemocracy and the Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute identifies four of what they refer to as “demand side” causes of forced labour: concentrated corporate power and ownership; outsourcing; irresponsible sourcing practices (E.g., fast fashion’s quick turnaround); and governance gaps.

Forced labour in global supply chains

The US Department of Labor produces a list of goods produced by child labor or forced labor. The most recent report is for 2018, and it is LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG. Forced labour can appear in any industry, and can affect the supply chains or direct operations of companies of different sizes.

The top five products at most risk of modern slavery, according to the Walk Free Foundation, are:

1. Laptops, mobile phones, and computers ($200.1 billion in at-risk products imported into the G20);

2. Garments ($127.7 billion);

3. Fish ($12.9 billion);

4. Cocoa ($3.6 billion); and

5. Sugarcane ($2.1 billion).

Every year, over $34 billion in goods imported into Canada are “at a high risk of having been produced by child or forced labour.” “More than 1,200 companies operating in Canada were identified as having imported one or more of these high-risk goods.” For global figures, see the Global Slavery Index produced by the Walk Free Foundation.

Workers are particularly vulnerable to forced labour in the lower tiers of global supply chains – extracting raw inputs and processing them. While forced labour is a complicated challenge, it is possible for companies to monitor their supply chains to reduce the risk that they are complicit.

Preventing forced labour in global supply chains

Companies can work to prevent forced labour in their supply chains by having policies, knowing where in their supply chain there are risks of forced labour; having supplier codes of conduct and carrying out due diligence; and training staff to recognize forced labour.

What should you do about it? 

Pick Leading Big Brands

You can try to look for brands that are taking action to address forced labour in their supply chains. But know that these leading brands have not eliminated forced labour.

For example, in 2019 the UK police uncovered the largest modern slavery operation in its history, involving 400 Polish trafficked workers. Some of those victims were employed by second-tier suppliers to major supermarket and building supply chains, including Tesco and Sainsbury’s – the two leading companies in Oxfam’s Supermarkets Scorecard for performance in protecting human rights.

Right now, there are no big brands that have truly eliminated forced labour from their supply chains. But there are companies that are doing much better than others.

The Stop Slavery Award recognizes companies with strong policies and processes to limit the risk of slavery in their supply chains and operations, as well as those acting as key agents in the global fight against slavery. Some previous winners include Apple, Unilever, Adidas, Intel, and Co-op.

Know the Chain’s benchmarking reports can help you find leaders and laggards in apparel and footwear; food and beverage; and information and communications technology.

Try Fairtrade

To the extent that Fairtrade labels are available, they can provide an alternative that is likely to be free from forced labour.

Fair trade is a set of movements, campaigns, and initiatives that have emerged in response to the negative effects of globalization. A product that is certified as Fairtrade has met a set of standards on pay, working conditions, and sometimes other social or environmental criteria. As we discussed in the Sugar episode, there are also fair trade member systems that work a bit differently.

However, there are some critiques of Fairtrade. Some see the use of fairtrade certification as “fairwashing” – meaning a way to superficially seem like a company is doing well on workers’ rights without actually addressing the problem. Critics tend not to argue that fair trade products are not living up to the standards established by certifying bodies. Instead, they argue that fair trade does not address the root causes of problems like forced labour.  

Boycott?

A boycott can be tempting, but it is almost impossible and potentially counterproductive. In his TEDx Talk, a Foreign Affairs producer at PBS Newshour named P.J. Tobia recommends focusing on one product at a time and learning about how the supply chain works, what is causing forced labour in that issue, and what solutions are being proposed. Then you can support NGOs working on the problem or lend your voice to promote policy change or to push a company to change its practices.

Use Your Voice to Promote Human Rights

Another thing you can do is tell your representative that you care about ratifying the ILO Protocol on Forced Labour. The Protocol on Forced Labour is an international treaty. To enter into force, it needs 50 states to ratify and currently only 45 states have done so.

If ratified, the Protocol on Forced Labour would require governments to take new measures to address forced labour. For instance, countries will need to increase inspections to protect workers and guarantee victims access to justice and compensation. Canada has already ratified, but the United States and Australia both have not. You can find out more about the ILO Protocol on Forced Labour and how to get involved at the 50 for Freedom campaign website.

In Canada, tell your Member of Parliament that you want to see the Modern Slavery Act (Bill S-211) become law, but you want it to include: higher penalties, due diligence requirements, and a broader focus on human rights (in addition to child and forced labour). The Modern Slavery Act would create an obligation for companies to report to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness on steps taken to prevent and reduce the risk of forced or child labour in any step of the production process. This Act is not as strong as its French and Dutch counterparts, but it is a good first step.

The UK’s Modern Slavery Act 2015 is the first such legislation, though other jurisdictions such as California and Australia now have similar laws. Most modern slavery laws only apply to large companies – for instance, only 150 companies are covered under the French legislation.

The Canadian Act was introduced for a first reading in the Senate in February. Read the report that spurred this legislation.

The Challenge

For our challenge, Kyla and I each looked at a specific good that has been linked to forced labour by the US Department of Labor. I chose rice. Kyla chose Christmas lights.

According to the US Department of Labour’s Sweat and Toil app, there has been forced labour documented in rice production in Burma, India, and Mali (as well as child labour in a few other countries).  

India: debt bondage

In 2007, 24 people were rescued from a rice mill in India. They had been “abused and enslaved” there. The mill owner was convicted under India’s Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act in 2018. There is another story from 2019 where a pregnant woman named Soniya working in debt bondage at a rice mill lost her baby because of the harsh working conditions. Even though debt bondage is illegal in India, in the country’s 2011 census India identified more than 135,000 bonded workers. Of course, the real figure is likely a lot higher – International Justice Mission estimates 500,000 bonded labourers just in the state of Tamil Nadu.

Myanmar: state-imposed forced labour

In Myanmar, there are accounts of up to 8,000 Rohingya Muslims being forced into hard labour by soldiers. Rice production is one of the industries in which this kind of forced labour occurs.

Mali: descent-based slavery

For Mali, forced labour primarily happens in rice production because members of the Bellah or Ikelan community in Northern Mali are often enslaved by Tuareg communities. Tuareg society is an ethnically casted society with five tiers. Three tiers are perceived racially as “white”, according to an article by Baz Lecocq. The lowest two tiers are perceived racially as “black”, a grouping of craftspeople and then the unfree caste of slaves. Colonialism reinforced this hierarchical pyramid, particularly the links between race and bondage. Mali is one of three countries in Western Africa where Anti-Slavery International has undertaken initiatives to address descent-based slavery.

Endnotes

[1] Amnesty International. (2017). Turning People into Profits: Abusive Recruitment, Trafficking and Forced Labour of Nepali Migrant Workers. London: Amnesty International Ltd.

Episode 34 - Operation Breadbasket

Boycotts

There are at least 198 methods of nonviolent action. And within this list, the word “boycott” features 17 times. A boycott campaign consists of a concerted refusal to spend money – as well as to convince others to refuse to spend money – on a product or service in the hopes of changing specific conditions or practices of an institution.

Although boycott campaigns draw on an adversarial communication frame, reform and redemption narratives often also accompany these campaigns because it is necessary to convince people that already consume a given product or service to stop doing so for a period of time. After all, there would hardly be a motive for businesses to change their behavior if the only people boycotting were those who did not consume the product in the first place.

Boycott campaigns typically escalate in four stages: announcing that a boycott is under consideration; calling for the boycott to begin at a certain point in the future; publicizing boycott preparations and any organizing that is underway; and initiating the boycott via demonstrations or picket lines. Notably, many boycott campaigns achieve their goals before reaching the fourth stage of actually initiating the boycott.

For over 200 years, the consumer boycott campaign has been a method of holding corporations accountable for their environmental and human rights practices, as well as those of their suppliers.

Boycotts and Civil Rights

Quick Summary of Civil Rights Movement

In typical narratives, the civil rights movement gave way to the black power movement after Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in Memphis in April 1968.[1]

The civil rights movement focused on ending discrimination, especially segregation, and establishing equal rights in law, whereas the black power movement emphasized black pride and black community control. The civil rights movement is most embodied by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), which was formed in 1957 following the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

The black power movement is most closely associated with the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense (BPP), which was founded in 1966 by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. The Black Panthers challenged police brutality through armed citizen patrols. They also carried out a number of community self-help programs like school lunches.

It is fair to say that the Black Panthers represent a more revolutionary movement, in contrast to the SCLC, which was tightly connected to Christian faith communities. The Black Panthers adopted a Marxist ideology and held the view that nonviolent direct action was inadequate to protect Black Americans from violence.

Deppe in his book emphasizes how these movements were really connected to a certain degree – ideologically, Operation Breadbasket took on elements of Black power as that movement started to gain ascendancy. 

One thing that I find interesting about the Breadbasket story, though, is that both movements were complementary. While Operation Breadbasket took a softer approach – negotiating with companies and occasionally practicing economic withdrawal – a looming background feature of their interaction with companies were the riots happening across American cities in the mid-late 1960s.

Why Operation Breadbasket?

Operation Breadbasket was a part of the civil rights movement that often gets ignored, but in fact it was one of the most successful elements of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)’s activities.[2]

One reason to talk about it is that it adds to our understanding of racial equality movements in the 20th century. As Martin Deppe argues in his book, Operation Breadbasket challenges the narrative that the civil rights movement faltered after MLK Jr.’s assassination and was replaced by the Black Power movement.[3]

Operation Breadbasket continued until 1971.[4] As Breadbasket continued, it incorporated certain elements of Black Power while also adhering to SCLC principles like nonviolence.[5]

And although Operation Breadbasket no longer exists in its current form, it continued as what is now known as Rainbow PUSH.[6]

A second reason to talk about Operation Breadbasket is broader: it provides a good model for how consumer power can play an important role in social change. Operation Breadbasket provides a successful model of direct action that continues today. It is also a powerful illustration of how well-organized boycott campaigns can work.

Boycotts and Civil Rights

Operation Breadbasket of course not first boycott movement used to fight anti-black racism in the US.

Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work

In 1929 Chicago, picketers launched a boycott of a department store called Woolworth under a “Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work” campaign. Woolworth agreed to a policy of hiring 25% Black employees in its stores, resulting in 2,000 jobs.[7]

The Montgomery Bus Boycott

Perhaps the most famous example is the Montgomery Bus Boycott, a boycott beginning in December 1955 that went on for 381 days. The bus boycotts were about more than desegregating buses. Black Americans did not only want to ride buses alongside white Americans: they also wanted to drive buses and own bus companies.[8]

The Birmingham Campaign (1963)

Campaign to end discriminatory economic policies. It included a boycott of businesses that hired only white people or maintained segregated restrooms.

Selective Patronage

Reverend Leon Sullivan of Philadelphia selective patronage, which refers to the strategic withholding of black patronage from businesses that discriminate, especially on Black employment. Selective patronage was inspired by the sit-ins in the deep South.

Leon Sullivan created a program where teams of ministers negotiated for jobs with corporations doing business in Black communities, with the threat of boycotts. By 1963, this program had opened up 2,000 skilled jobs in Philadelphia.[9] Sullivan was asked to present on this model to the SCLC in Atlanta. That presentation led to the creation of Operation Breadbasket in Atlanta in 1962.

Operation Breadbasket

Economic Liberation

Between 1916 and 1970, more than 6 million Black Americans relocated from the rural South to cities in Northern, Midwestern, and Western America. This Great Migration was prompted by the harsh segregationist laws and poor economic opportunities in the south. Economic opportunities for Black Americans during the first and second world wars helped to spur this trend.

When WWI ended many Black Americans were fired or expected to return to unskilled jobs. The Great Depression was particularly harsh on Black unemployment: in 1931, 58.5 percent of employable Black women and 43.5 percent of employable Black men were unemployed.[10]

While Black employment rose during WWII and continued during the period of general economic prosperity in the 1950s, by 1960 the job ceiling for Black Americans became an increasing point of contention.[11] By the mid-1960s the unemployment rate amongst Black Chicagoans was twice that of white Chicagoans, for example.[12]

Deindustrialization and the loss of American manufacturing made this situation worse.[13]At the same time, the mid-1960s was a period of protest – which in some cases resulted in violence. There was a growing sense that Black Americans “would no longer quietly submit to the deprivation of slum life.”[14]

President Lyndon B Johnson is quotes as saying privately: “The Negro…[is] still nowhere. He knows it. And that’s why he’s out in the streets. Hell, I’d be there too.”[15]

It was in this context that SCLC moved north in the 1960s to address a new form of segregation – the slum. Housing equality and economic liberation became focal points. Early housing efforts failed due to intransigence from the Mayor, and so jobs became the primary focus. Operation Breadbasket “was a response to the color line in employment.”[16] 

Operation Breadbasket

The SCLC first established Operation Breadbasket in 1962 in Atlanta. Breadbasket was explicitly modelled on Leon Sullivan’s selective patronage.[17] Operation Breadbasket in Atlanta began with the bread industry. The first campaign was against Colonial Bakery, which gave in to Breadbasket’s demands after a boycott and picketing. Between 1962 and 1966, Atlanta Breadbasket won 4,000 jobs and $15 million of income to the Black community there.[18]

Chicago Breadbasket

When SCLC moved north to Chicago, Operation Breadbasket was formed there and became a core element of the SCLC’s overall strategy. Specifically, Breadbasket was launched in Chicago in 1966 with a group of 60 pastors who together formed a steering committee.[19] Reverend Jesse Jackson led Chicago Breadbasket, with guidance from Martin Luther King Jr..[20] Breadbasket was significant in launching Jackson’s civil rights career.[21]

Operation Breadbasket obtained its name from the concept of a breadbasket as “putting food on the table in the form of a steady job”[22]

The Breadbasket Model

Operation Breadbasket had a number of components, but its main focus was creating job opportunities for Black Americans through consumer pressure. The model included six core steps:

1.     Information gathering: a team of clergy would go to the company and request a copy of its Equal Employment Opportunity Commission annual report, a document mandated by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They also asked for salaries by category.

2.     Committee Evaluation: Then, the committee would decide on a set of demands. The baseline was a minimum demand of 20% Black employees (28% of Chicagoans were Black at the time), but this could be adjusted based on factors like where the company was operating.

3.     Education and negotiation: then a team of clergy would meet with company executives to try to reach agreement on targets and deadlines for a “covenant”.

4.     Economic withdrawal and picketing: when CEOs refused to share information or to continue discussions, pastors would call for a boycott from their pulpits. This would be coupled with picketing and leafleting. Economic withdrawal was not necessary in every case, but it was pretty common.

5.     Agreement/Covenant: when the Breadbasket team and the company agreed on a set of targets, they would formalize it in an agreement or covenant. At that time, any economic withdrawal would be officially called off. The agreements would be signed at a formal ceremony.

6.     Monitoring: this was a later addition to the strategy, but it proved important. Breadbasket team members would regularly follow up to monitor the implementation of the agreements. When companies didn’t hold to their commitments (or reasonably close), Breadbasket would initiate another economic withdrawal.

Outcomes

Chicago Breadbasket began with the bread, milk, soft drink, and soup companies, before moving on to other industries like supermarkets and construction.

In the six years that Operation Breadbasket operated, it created 4,500 jobs for Black Chicagoans, an estimated $29 million in income annually.[23] That’s not including the income it created for black products and service contracts – if you include that, Breadbasket created $57.5 million annually for the African American community by 1971 (equivalent to $391.8 million in 2016 dollars).[24]

Operation Breadbasket is forerunner to Operation PUSH (1971), which is now the Rainbow PUSH Coalition (formed in 1987).

The Challenge

Stop Hate for Profit boycott movement, which is calling on companies to boycott Facebook Ads until Facebook agrees to establish and empower permanent civil rights infrastructure so products and policies can be evaluated for discrimination, racism, and hate by experts.

Stop Hate for Profit is promoted by a coalition of various racial equality groups, as well as at least one union and Mozilla.

Footnotes

[1] Deppe, Martin. (2017). Operation Breadbasket: An Untold Story of Civil Rights in Chicago, 1966-1971. Atlanta: University of Georgia Press.

[2] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[3] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[4] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[5] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[6] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[7] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[8] Ezra, Michael. (2013). Introduction: The Economic Dimensions of the Black Freedom Struggle. In M. Ezra (ed.) The Economic Civil Rights Movement: African Americans and the Struggle for Economic Power. New York: Routledge, pp. 1-5.

[9] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[10] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[11] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[12] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[13] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[14] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket p.7.

[15] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket p.7.

[16] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket p.5.

[17] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[18] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[19] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[20] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[21] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[22] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket xxvii.

[23] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[24] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

Episode 25 - Ten Things We Learned About Black Lives Matter

We wanted to do something to lend our voices in support of the Black Lives Matter protests. As allies, the best way we could think to do this was to highlight our own learning journeys. So here are five things each of us have learned since the killing of George Floyd.

What Kristen Learned

1. Americans have donated an unprecedented amount of money to bail funds around the country, including $30 million for the Minnesota Freedom Fund.

Community bail funds are really important because they free people who are being imprisoned without having been convicted of a crime.

470,000 Americans in local jails have not been convicted of a crime; they are in jail because they cannot afford the bail bond that has been set for them.  Over half of the people in jail who could not make bail were parents of children under 18. Bail can cost thousands of dollars or more. Many view it as discriminatory and unjust. Bail is also racist: bail rates are twice as high for racialized Americans.

Bail can be used in an undemocratic way. The threat of arrest and pretrial imprisonment are deterrents to political protest. Police sometimes use arrest as a tactic for suppressing protest. Bail funds can help to support democratic dissent by providing a financial safety net against pretrial detention.

 At least 9,300 protesters have been arrested in the American George Floyd protests so far.

 Black Lives Matter learned the importance of bail funds from their experience in the 2014 protests following the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. But this isn’t by any means a new tactic. Black Americans have been pooling money to free family members and friends going back to the slavery era. 

Donating to bail funds is a good way to support protesters who are arrested in the course of exercising their rights to peacefully dissent. The use of bail and legal defence funds can combat the punitive measures that police try to impose and alleviate the pressure to plead guilty.

 If you want more information, here is a guide to donating through bail funds, community organizations, and direct aid.

2. Most Canadian police forces do not wear body cameras.

 The Calgary Police implemented a body camera policy in 2018, following the conviction of an officer of assaulting an Indigenous man. But most Canadian police forces do not use body cams.

Body cameras have been successfully piloted by some police forces. Toronto Police ran a successful pilot project using body cameras in 2016. Although body cameras were recommended as an outcome of the pilot project, the department ignored the recommendation.

The recent death of Regis Korchinski-Paquet in Toronto has renewed calls for the use of body cameras on the Toronto Police force. Korchinski-Paquet’s death is still under investigation, but the mother alleges that Korchinski-Paquet was pushed off of the balcony by police. Though we may never know what happened, as police were the only ones inside the unit with Korchinski-Paquet, her situation echoes several other killings in the GTA by police in situations where the victim was experiencing a mental health crisis. In 2015 Andrew Loku was shot dead within five minutes of police arriving at his apartment. D’Andre Campbell was fatally shot by police in April 2020 by the Peel Police in Brampton. Mental health was a factor in all three incidents, which highlights ongoing problems with police’s ability to de-escalate.

 The other unifying factor in all three of these cases (and others) is race. Black people in Toronto are twenty-times more likely to be shot by police, according to an Ontario Human Rights Commission report.

A petition calling for Toronto police officers to be equipped with body cameras has more than 100,000 signatures. You can sign it by clicking here.

The RCMP piloted body cameras twice: in 2010 and 2013. Then they did a feasibility study, which was released in 2015. While the technical requirements of body cameras listed in the feasibility study matched an existing device made by Axon, the RCMP announced a year later that they were indefinitely postponing the implementation of body cameras due to a lack of available technology. The feasibility report itself found that using the technology would be worthwhile to improve accountability and transparency.

 On May 5, 2020, a 31-year old man in Clyde River, Nunavut, was killed in an altercation with an RCMP officer. This incident inspired renewed calls for the RCMP to wear body cameras. The Nunavut RCMP is currently under investigation for three police shootings in 2020. And that’s just the cases in Nunavut, which has a population under 40,000 people.

3. There is a thing called a public health approach to crime prevention, and it’s pretty cool.

A public health approach essentially treats crime and violence as a contagious disease rather than an individual moral failing. And because it is an illness, violence can be treated. The public health approach seeks to prevent violence by proactively addressing the social factors that make it more likely to spread, rather than reactively punishing perpetrators. And it recognizes that violence reflects inequalities in society.

 Basically, the idea is: “If dangerous behaviour is like a contagious disease, perhaps positive relationships can serve as an antidote.” (quote from this article) This approach uses public health principles to carry out interventions that prevent violence through the contextual factors that influence it. For instance, people that experience violence often perpetrate it themselves. It tends to be service-based, rather than punitive. So, you might address things like homelessness, addiction, trauma, and unemployment.

Scotland has effectively used this approach to reduce the murder rate in Glasgow by 60%. It is the only country that has a public health model embedded across its police force.

 To deploy a public health, you have to really understand a community and what is driving violence – since the causes aren’t the same everywhere. But one solution that has been used in a few places, including Philadelphia, is converting empty lots into green spaces – basically making them into parks. Studies have found that this project reduced crime and made nearby residents feel safer. 

4. The extent to which municipal budgets are dominated by spending on police.

 Calls to defund the police generally are not about abolishing the police completely – although that is a position that some have. More commonly, though, defunding the police means remedying an imbalance in how we allocate resources. It means spending more on education, mental health, housing, poverty reduction, transit, and any number of other things.

 Which makes a lot of sense when you consider that municipal budgets are often dominated by spending on police. In Toronto, for instance, more than 20% of property tax revenue ($703.31 of an average property tax bill of $3020) goes to police. It is the single largest expenditure. And that’s actually small compared to some other places. Percent of operating budget spent on policing in a few American cities:

And part of the problem is that police budgets have been increasing at the same time as we disinvest from other kinds of social spending, or at a higher rate of increase than other spending areas. Vancouver’s spending on police has increased by 140% since 2001.

Elamin Abdelmahmoud talked about this in a really accessible way on the June 4 episode of the Party Lines podcast.

5. It’s okay to fuck up.

“The beauty of anti-racism is that you don’t have to pretend to be free of racism to be anti-racist. Anti-racism is the commitment to fight racism wherever you find it, including in yourself.” – Ijeoma Oluo, author of So You Want to Talk About Race.

There are lots of good resources on allyship out there, but I particularly recommend this one, this one (which actually argues that the term ally is problematic, as the fight needs to be ours too), this one, and this one.

Lots of these guides point out that on our learning journey, allies will discover lots of things that are obvious to the people experiencing that form of oppression, in this case racism. And inevitably, in the process of becoming an ally, you are going to fuck up. You will fuck up more at first, and less over time. But you will always fuck up a little because the only way to truly understand oppression is to live it.

That is kind of a freeing notion. It means that you should try to do your best, but if you approach the fight with earnest intentions and humility you’ll be fine. Apologize when you fuck up and don’t take it personally. It also means that there is always more to learn. This guide offers some good questions that you can ask yourself to become a better ally.

On your learning journey, you have to teach yourself. Don’t put this burden on your BIPOC friends, colleagues, and acquaintances. They have enough shit to deal with. Sometimes if a friend is close enough they can answer questions, but you have to really know that relationship and know that the person you are asking feels comfortable enough to say no to you. As a starting point why not check out this resource, which answers common questions about the Black Lives Matter movement? You can also check out this antiracist reading list.

Because it’s actually not about you. Try asking yourself what BIPOC people are getting out of you as a potential ally, and how you can be better.

What Kyla Learned

1.       Looting

Here is an article discussing the responses to the argument “looting never solves anything”.
Terry Nguyen has written an interesting and more nuanced article on looting as well.
And one more article about wealth redistribution, because I can’t help myself and the real looters are people and companies who hoard wealth and don’t pay tax.

I.            Most of the looting, at least in New York, appears not to have been done by protesters but by opportunists not associated with the protests.

II.            We’re living through a time when people, especially in the USA, can’t get their basic needs met during a pandemic where many have lost their jobs and the healthcare attached to those jobs. People are angry and desperate and the police are instigating violence during these protests.

III.            The media focuses on looting, saying it takes away from the cause, when they’re the ones who choose to focus on it instead of focusing on the cause. The vast majority of protesters are there for the cause and not looting.

IV.            It’s pretty hypocritical considering how Canada and the USA were founded on property theft from the people who already lived here.

V.            After years of peaceful protests being ignored, maybe some property damage will get the attention needed for systemic change.

VI.            People’s lives are more important than property.

VII.            Large companies are guilty of wage theft. Nearly $15bn/yr in the US. Even if these companies didn’t have insurance, they can stand to lose a few items off the sales floor.

VIII.          Most places have insurance, even the small businesses.

IX.            People’s lives are more important than property.

To finish this first section, here is a quote from an Atlantic article by Olga Khazan:
For one thing, looters and peaceful protesters aren’t typically the same people. Dana Fisher, a sociologist at the University of Maryland, has studied protests for 20 years, and she says it’s rare for peaceful protesters to start stealing and setting fires at random. People flock to the sites of protests with different motivations, and those who want peace tend to stay peaceful. “I’ve never seen somebody come in who’s peaceful and then it’s like, Hey, they just broke that window over there. I’m going to now start looting,” she told me.

Those in the looting group also have varied motivations. In their 1968 study, Dynes and Quarantelli note that vandalism during protests focuses on objects and buildings that are “symbolic of other values.” For example, people are more likely to attack symbols of authority—such as the CNN building or police cars—than apartment buildings.

In this way, some of the looting is a lashing-out against capitalism, the police, and other forces that are seen as perpetuating racism. “Widespread looting, then, may perhaps be interpreted as a kind of mass protest against our dominant conceptions of property,” Dynes and Quarantelli wrote. It is a “bid for the redistribution of property.”

2.       Counter-Intelligence Program

Credit to a twitter thread from Claire Willett that was circulating.
Started by J. Edgar Hoover, it was an illegal spying operation run by the FBI meant to discredit progressive activist movements, mostly the Black Civil rights leaders. Behind the Bastards have covered the Black Panthers, and it’s well worth a listen. Here’s Part One and Part Two.

3.       Police officers are worse than I thought

They don’t need military gear.
They’ll pretend to support protesters for the optics and escalate situations after the photos are taken.
It’s nearly impossible to prosecute or fire a cop. Police Unions will often protect officers who should be prosecuted.

4.       Defunding the police means reinvesting in social programs. See Kristen’s 3rd point above

5.       I’ve learned more about awful historical hate crimes.

However bad I thought history was, learning the details makes it so much worse. Schools need to be teaching black history in the normal curriculum. If you support this, send your Minister of Education a quick email saying so!

Tulsa Massacre

The Red Summer

Episode 19 - Personal Behaviour Changes and the Climate Crisis

This episode we were joined by Robert Miller, a progressive activist and organizer based out of Edmonton, Alberta. One of the groups he works with is Extinction Rebellion. Since this was an interview episode, a research note is a bit tricky to do. So, what I’ve done here is just include the prep notes that I did, to give a sense of themes.

Belief and the Climate Crisis 

Johnathan Safran Foer in We Are the Weather writes about the psychological difficulty that humans experience in truly believing climate science. What he means by that is that many of us know the climate science, but we don’t really believe it – not enough to really change the way that we live in the ways that the climate crisis demands.

One of the threads throughout the book is this question that he raises around his grandmother’s decision to leave her village when the Holocaust was beginning. And the decision of family members who stayed. All of them had access to the same knowledge, but there is something different going on when it comes to really believing it and acting on that belief.

And we see this a lot with the climate crisis, I think: this idea that we are in the middle of the greatest crisis that humankind has ever faced, that we know we have a decade to take radical leaps to prevent runaway climate change.

And yet my life goes on more or less as normal. And I think that’s the way it is for a lot of people. So, I guess my question is: how can we get people to really believe in climate change, in the deep-seated way that we needed to?

Climate Anxiety and Climate Grief

One idea is that we can’t really conceptualize the climate crisis until we acknowledge its ability to kill us. That’s a pretty heavy thing to accept.

Do you experience climate anxiety? How do you deal with it?

Of course, the other side of climate anxiety is climate grief – coping with what we’ve already lost and what we cannot save. I think for me at least, climate grief is harder to cope with than climate anxiety.

What would you say to people that are just starting to confront climate grief, or to even realize that climate grief is a thing?

Which Personal Behaviour Changes Are Best?

Nearly two-thirds of global emissions are linked to direct and indirect forms of human consumption. So, in theory at least, there’s a lot that we can personally do to address the climate crisis.

What, in your view, is the single most important personal behaviour change people can make to address the climate crisis?

Eating a plant-based diet

We’ve talked on the podcast before about the environmental benefits of eating a plant-based diet – whether that means going fully vegan or becoming a ‘flexitarian’ or ‘reducetarian’. By one suggestion, a climate-sensitive flexitarian diet would mean eating about 1.5oz of meat daily (or, about three hamburgers worth per week). And just a reminder from our previous episodes that the world is an animal farm – about 30% of the earth’s land mass is used for animal agriculture or animal feed. Emissions from food production could surge by 87% by 2050.

Robert, you’ve been vegan for a while. Was it the climate crisis that motivated you to become vegan, or something else? What advice would you give to someone who cares about the climate, but who is intimidated about the prospect of going vegetarian or vegan?

I just want to quickly highlight some of the other personal behaviour changes that are often recommended:

Reducing your food waste

GHG emissions associated with food loss and waste is as much as 8-10% of all global emissions.

Composting

By the time this episode comes out, we’ll have already released the zero-waste episode. In that episode we talked about how organic waste is the majority of garbage people throw away. Composting can help us fight climate change because landfilled organic materials produce methane, a super potent GHG.

In an episode on biogas, we talk about the potential for turning food waste into energy!

Driving less, cycling, walking, and taking public transit more

In 2010, the transport sector was responsible for over 25% of global energy demand.

Having kids?

There is one last lifestyle change that I want us to reflect on a bit, and that is having children. A lot of people worry about bringing children into a world that is quite likely going to look a lot worse in a generation than it does today. Others have concerns that producing more humans contributes to the increases in consumption that are causing the climate crisis. What are your thoughts on becoming a parent in the climate change era?

What’s wrong with fighting the climate crisis with personal behaviour changes?

Some articles say that lifestyle changes are the only answer to the climate crisis, while others say that we can’t address climate change through personal behaviour. So, who’s right?

Themes within this: inefficiency (there’s so much we cannot personally control); personal behaviour changes are way easier for some than others; and climate justice, environmental racism.

Do We Need Mandatory Rationing?

A lot of people have used wartime rationing as an example for how personal behaviour can address the climate crisis. For instance, Bill McKibben has said, “it’s not that global warming is like a world war. It is a world war. And we are losing.” The suggestions along this line usually include stuff like marshaling extraordinary public investment to build solar panels, wind farms, electrified public transit, tree-planting et cetera. It could also include meat rations and, more controversially, retreat and re-wilding.

What are some of the benefits and drawbacks of taking a wartime approach to the climate?

As we get closer to 2030, are we running out of other options?

The Green New Deal

One thing that I’ve started to hear a lot in climate discussions is how we need to focus on the opportunities of decarbonization as well as the costs. We often hear this in the context of the Green New Deal.

What is the Green New Deal, in a nutshell? What are some of the benefits that we could achieve from acting collectively on the climate crisis, aside from averting catastrophe?

Learn more about the Green New Deal for Canada.

How to Promote Collective Action Changes

Political scientists love to talk about climate change as a collective action problem. Basically what that means is that the benefits of addressing climate change are diffuse (and mostly in the future), while the costs are specific (and mostly in the present). So, there are huge incentives to free ride, which makes collective action difficult. Or, to put it in the slightly flashier language of journalist Oliver Burkeman: “If a cabal of evil psychologists had gathered in a secret undersea base to concoct a crisis humanity would be hopelessly ill-equipped to address, they couldn’t have done better than climate change”.

We hear this narrative a lot in Canada from climate delayers: that Canada is a small part of the world’s global emissions and we can’t take on climate change, so why bother. What would you say to that?And what about the idea that the world still needs oil, so someone has to supply it? What does collective action on climate look like, from your perspective?

How Can You Support Collective Action?

Vote!

Vote for the candidate that has the best climate stance. If you live in America, the Sunrise Movement identifies Green New Deal champions. What should someone do if they don’t see sufficient climate policies reflected in any of their major parties or candidates?

Sign petitions, write your MP, your MPP, your councillor

Petitions are helpful for advocacy groups, because it helps them talk to politicians. When an advocacy group meets with an MP, it’s a lot easier to get his attention when you can show that people in the constituency care about that issue. The Citizens’ Climate Lobby has good tools for talking about the climate crisis.

Go to climate rallies

Protests make issues visible, and crowd-size matters. Activists often talk about the idea that non-violent revolutions have, historically, usually been successful when they mobilize 3.5% of the population. (From Erica Chenoweth’s research). In September 2019, roughly that percentage of Canadians participated in the climate strike. Do you think anything has changed as a result of recent climate strikes? And if not, why not?

Donate to or volunteer with a climate group of a climate champion candidate

There is a lot you can do with your time as a climate action volunteer: door-knocking, calling, pamphleting, flyering, postering, et cetera. Let’s say a listener is interested in helping out, but showing up at protests isn’t something they’re comfortable with. What would you say to them? What are some helpful ways they could get involved?

Become a citizen climate scientist

If science is your jam, there are ways to get involved as a citizen scientist.

Bring up climate change in your social circles, even if it’s awkward

This is where I think personal behaviour can spur social change, too. Any tips on how to raise the climate crisis with climate agnostics in a way that won’t alienate them.

Personal Behaviour Changes ARE Collective Action Changes

That is why acting matters, even if it is small. Because “the most contagious standards are the ones that we model” (JSF). So be the person at the protest, even if there are only a few hundred people there – even if there are only a dozen people there. Try to reduce your carbon footprint. Go flexitarian, or reducetarian, or vegetarian, or vegan. The people who love you will notice. And when they change, even just a little, it matters.

Also mentioned in the episode:

Wet’suwet’en Solidarity
350.org
Fridays For Future Climate Strikes

Episode 09 - Veganuary

Veganism as a Set of Ideas and a Movement

History of veganism

The term veganism was coined in 1944 by a British guy named Donald Watson and a small group of non-dairy vegetarians. When they were creating the word vegan, they also suggested: dairyban, vitan, benevore, neo-vegetarian, sanivores, and beaumangeur.

And that is how the Vegan Society came to be founded. Veganism is, as self-described, “A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals, and the environment.” Veganism is still a bit more of a fringe lifestyle, which is why it is so much harder – whereas almost every restaurant today will have a vegetarian option that is not always true for vegans.

History of Veganuary

Veganuary is a campaign started by a British charity with the same name that was founded in 2014. In 2019, the nonprofit says that 250,000 people took the pledge to try a vegan diet. Veganuary also draws participation from 500 companies, and it has become a hub for launching plant-based products and menus. Veganuary is also supported by Joaquin Phoenix, who lobbied for the all-vegan menu at this year’s Golden Globes. The campaign also aims to raise awareness and to mobilize people into a mainstream vegan movement.

Why veganism?

Although there is a wide spectrum of vegans that have different justifications for their lifestyle choice, most vegans view animal welfare as one of the main reasons behind their choice. From an animal welfare perspective, vegans argue that vegetarianism just doesn’t cut it: dairy and egg family can be just as bad or worse for animal welfare.

The strongest version of the argument says that we shouldn’t use animals as an end at all – so some vegans view it as wrong to even, say, shear a very happy sheep for wool. But most vegans focus on the very real contemporary horrors of our modern food, clothing, and cosmetics industries. The famous historian Yuval Noah Harari (author of Sapiens and Homo Deus), called animal farming “the worst crime in history”.[1]

And many vegans explicitly take aim at the idea that humane meat is possible. Many of today’s “humane” standards, like cage-free eggs, still leave animals in cruel conditions.  

What about wild game? A lot of vegans have ethical issues with killing animals at all, but many will grant that this is a lesser harm than factory farming. However, from an environmental perspective, vegans will often point out that it would be impossible to feed the planet if everyone was consuming this kind of ‘humane’ meat (at least, in anywhere near the quantities that we do today). So, in some sense buying wild game or humane meat from local organic farms is a kind of modern indulgence for privileged aspects of society.

Veganism and whiteness

But the vegan movement has run into some issues of its own when it comes to race and inclusivity. 

For Indigenous people, hunting is a traditional way of life. Especially given the trauma that has been inflicted upon these populations continually since colonization, the ability to connect to traditions is an important part of cultural healing and resilience. Indigenous peoples will also point out that environmental stewardship and respect for the land and animals is embedded in their cultural traditions. So, from their perspective hunting is a morally justifiable part of their way of life. It’s also a crucial component of food sovereignty for Indigenous communities.

This is where vegan activists have sometimes come into conflict with Indigenous people. From an Indigenous perspective, some vegan activists have a White Animal Savior complex, which is inherently anti-indigenous. For example, in 2017 animal activists targeted a new Indigenous-owned and -operated restaurant in Toronto because it had seal on the menu. This was despite the fact that the restaurant (Kū-Kum Kitchen) made a point of vetting the hunters from whom they sourced their seal meat. For more on this issue, check out the documentary Angry Inuk.

More generally, vegan activism has also been criticized for racism against other communities. In 2003 PETA released an ad that related the poultry industry to the Holocaust. Animal activists have made similar associations between animal farming and slavery. 

We also need to talk about the connection between veganism and white nationalism, because Nazis ruin everything. Evidently, a sizable portion of white nationalists are vegan. This has something to do with the concept of “blood and soil” that is a bedrock of white nationalism. Apparently, Hitler was famously vegetarian, which I just learned. But if you recall the uncomfortable association between early vegetarianism and eugenics, it’s not all that surprising.

Finally, until recently been a lack of BIPOC representation in animal rights organizations. As this is starting to change, animal rights activists are becoming attuned to the need to become more intersectional. That means thinking seriously about oppression and developing strategies that are more inclusive.

If you want to be a woke vegan, Gloria Oladipo offers a few tips in an article she wrote for Afropunk. First, non’t culturally appropriate – vegan versions of cultural dishes should come from members of that culture. Next, support initiatives that make plants more accessible – food deserts are often in racialized communities, and solving that problem should be a first focus. Third, feature more BIPOC vegans. (Actually, polling has found that Black and Latinx Americans are vegetarian in roughly the same proportions as white Americans.[2] BIPOC individuals should be represented and should have leadership roles in the movement). And finally, show up for BIPOC causes – acknowledge that BIPOC go through a lot and be an ally.

A friendlier, more inclusive animal-free movement?

That new inclusivity focus has already benefited the movement immensely by underscoring the need to focus on institutional change, rather than individual lifestyle choices. This is one of the core points that Jacy Reese makes in his book, The End of Animal Farming. So, rather than shaming individuals for eating meat, the animal-free movement is now focusing on shaming factory farms and pushing for institutional change.[3] Reese argues that this is actually more efficient because it helps people to overcome status quo bias and mobilizes a wider base of support.  

This is helpful from a strategic perspective because most people already think factory farming is bad; they just feel overwhelmed by the problem and powerless to change things. 32% of Americans believe “animals deserve the same rights as people to be free from harm and exploitation” and another 62% believe they deserve “some rights”, according to a 2015 Gallup poll.[4] The increase in pro-animal rights attitudes over the 1990s and early 2000s is generally attributed to: urban pet ownership, cosmopolitanism, feminism, and religious trends (secularization and the increasing popularity of pro-vegetarian religions like Buddhism). In California, Proposition 2 (a ballot initiative to ban animal confinement in small spaces) drew the highest positive turnout for a citizen initiative in the state’s history.[5]

Tactics like animal farm investigations have also helped, by exposing the conditions in factory farms. The first modern animal farm investigation was carried out in 1992 on a foie gras farm, exposing force-feeding. In the late 1990s and early 2000s these investigations became increasingly popular. “A 1998 PETA investigation of a pig-breeding farm led to the first felony indictments ever for cruelty to farmed animals”.[6] The Humane Society of the US “released a ground-breaking undercover investigation of a California slaughterhouse” in 2008.[7] As these investigations gained prominence, the meat, dairy, and egg industries started to lobby for “ag-gag” laws to limit the ability of activists to document animal farm operations.[8]

Veganism as a Dietary Choice

Vegans don’t eat animals or animal-derived products. This obviously includes meat, fish, poultry, dairy, and eggs. But one of the most difficult things about going vegan is navigating all of the secret animal products in our food.

Animal-derived ingredients

PETA has a comprehensive list of animal-derived ingredients. Dummies.com also has a list. Theirs doesn’t include everything on the PETA list. But it has an easy-to-use layout.

Some of the most common animal-derived ingredients include:

o   Beeswax and honey;

o   Casein (a milk protein derived from animal’s milk), calcium caseinate, sodium caseinate;

o   Confectioner’s glaze, resinous glaze, shellac, natural glaze, pure food glaze (comes from a hardened resinous material secreted by the lac insect);

o   Gelatin (a gelling agent derived from animal collagen);

o   Isinglass (a clarifying agent used in making wine and brewing beer, derived from fish bladders);

o   L. cysteine (a dough conditioner in some pre-packaged breads and baked goods, often sourced from feathers or human hair);

o   Whey (the liquid that remains once milk has been curdled or churned and strained);

o   Carmine (used as a red dye, this is from ground cochineal scale insects);

o   Lactose, saccharum lactin, d-lactose (I found this in chips a lot; it’s essentially a milk sugar);

o   Vitamin D3 (not all, but most Vitamin D3 is derived from fish oil or the lanolin in sheep’s wool) and omega-3 fatty acids (similarly, mostly derived from fish but vegan alternatives are available); and

o   Additives beginning with E (e.g. E904) are often animal-derived.

Veganism tips and tricks

To find out if packaged food is vegan, first look for vegan labelling (“Suitable for Vegans”, “Certified Vegan”). Then you can look for allergen information (e.g.: “Contains milk, eggs, shellfish”). Allergen information won’t generally tell you about meat-containing ingredients, so you should also read the ingredients list. There are some items that can be vegan but typically won’t be (e.g. bread, candy, chips, and beer/wine).

Fruits and vegetables are weirdly not always vegan. That is because they are often coated with either beeswax or a resin called shellac. These make the fruit look prettier, and also can reduce moisture loss and delay rotting. Synthetic polyethylene wax (a petroleum by-product) and carnauba wax (a palm derivative) are common, though problematic vegan substitutes.

If you are looking for a book with practical advice on how to go vegan, check out How To Live Vegan by a pair Youtubers that call themselves Bosh!

Meat substitutes

The first reference to plant-based food that mimicked animal flesh was about tofu in 965 AD. The Magistrate of Qing Yang (China) “encouraged tofu consumption as a more frugal alternative to animal flesh, referring to it as “mock lamb chops” and “the vice mayor’s mutton.””[9]

The first reference to vegetarian meat in Western civilization wasn’t until 1852, referring to a sausage-like mixture made by squeezing chopped turnips and beets.[10] The first recorded veggie burger was created in 1939,[11] and Tofurky was introduced in 1995.[12]

Beyond Meat and the Impossible Burger are two plant-based burgers that are designed to mimic the culinary characteristics of beef burgers. They were both released around the same time. Impossible Burger released its burger in trendy restaurants, whereas Beyond Meat went straight to households by retailing at Whole Foods.[13] The plant-based food industry is now big enough to have an industry association (the Plant Based Foods Association).[14] Major food corporations are now investing in plant-based start-ups or creating their own plant-based food items: Unilever has released its own eggless mayonnaise;[15] General Mills invested in a nut based cheese and yogurt company called Kite Hill;[16] and Tyson Foods invested in a 5% share in Beyond Meat.[17]

Cultured meat

Cultured meat is also called cell-cultured meat, cell-based meat, in-vitro meat, lab-grown meat, and clean meat.[18] In 1998 NASA-funded engineers successfully grew goldfish meat in vitro, but the first cultured meat that people admit to eating was an art exhibition of cultured frog meat created by Australian artist Oron Catts in 2003.[19] There are now four main cultured meat companies racing to the market: MosaMeat, Memphis Meats, Hampton Creek, and SuperMeat.[20]

Endnotes

[1] Reese, Jacy. (2018). The End of Animal Farming. Boston, MA: Beacon Press Books at p.x.

[2] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[3] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[4] Reese, The End of Animal Farming at p.4.

[5] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[6] Reese, The End of Animal Farming at p.24.

[7] Reese, The End of Animal Farming at p.27.

[8] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[9] Reese, The End of Animal Farming at p.46.

[10] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[11] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[12] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[13] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[14] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[15] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[16] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[17] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[18] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[19] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.

[20] Reese, The End of Animal Farming.