Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Student Blog #5: Inequality and the Caste System in India

...but there the laws of religion, the laws of the land, and the laws of honour, are all united and consolidated in one invariable system, and bind men [sic] by eternal and indissoluble bonds to the rules of what, amongst them, is called his [sic] caste.
Edmund Burke (1852:310)

Just the other day, the Starphoenix ran a story about a couple in India who were attacked with machetes for having married outside their caste. The wife remains in intensive care while the husband sadly succumbed to his wounds. Despite being caught on CCTV cameras the attackers remain at large (The Starphoenix 2016).

Discrimination based on caste – including prejudice against “untouchables” or “Dalits”, “backwards castes”, and other markers of difference based on descent – is a significant social justice issue in contemporary Indian society. Caste is a complex system of social stratification which allows for little, if any, possibility for social mobility outside of the particular caste into which one is born. According to Human Rights Watch (HRW) approximately 260 million people are affected by caste-based discrimination worldwide, most of whom reside in the South Asian countries of Nepal and India (HRW 2016). Low caste people regularly suffer discrimination in many forms, including perpetual extreme poverty, degrading and humiliating work, violence enacted by upper caste militias and police, and obstacles towards accessing education. Furthermore, women experience additional discrimination due to intersections between caste, gender, and poverty, which put them at even greater risk of sexual assault, forced sex work, violence and indignity through crimes from which the perpetrators walk with impunity (HRW 2016). Despite caste-based discrimination being rendered illegal under India's constitution since gaining independence from Britain in 1947, corruption within the justice system and ineffective bureaucracy makes filing complaints and seeing justice enacted remains prohibitively complex and ineffective for most people.

Last summer I had the opportunity to connect with a very interesting organization working to end caste-based discrimination in the villages surrounding the city of Varanasi, India. The Peoples' Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) was started in 1996 by Lenin Raghuvanshi and his wife Shruti Nagvanshi, along with musician Pandit Vikash Maharaj, poet Gyanendra Pati, and historian Mahendra Pratap. I was lucky enough to get to meet with Dr. Raghuvanshi for an afternoon to hear about his personal story and the projects in which the PVCHR are involved, and I was inspired by their breadth of scope and creative approaches to community-based social justice work.

What initially prompted me to seek out the PVCHR was a personal question that I had about the appropriateness of applying universal human rights – which I regarded as a Western construct – in non-Western cultural contexts. It is not that I was in any way in support of exploitation based on caste due to reasons of cultural relativism, but rather skeptical of the use of the language of human rights by aid organizations that apply western interpretations of human rights to developing countries. While there are certainly examples from the last six decades to suggest that human rights language can be mobilized for imperial purposes, my brief time at PVCHR helped to shift my thinking towards the possibility for social justice initiatives to use the language of human rights in an effective culturally attentive way through community based work.

Though textual evidence confirms that forms of the caste system have existed for hundreds of years in the Indian subcontinent, the contemporary form of right-wing Hindu nationalism which promotes casteism – known as the Hindutva movement as championed by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) organization – was formed in the 1920s as a manifestation of British colonialism (The Kashmir Scenario 2014). Alternatively, PVCHR identifies tolerant, plural, and syncretic threads in Indian society throughout history, promoted by famous figures such as Kabir and Raidas in the 15th century. As such, the question of caste politics is open to change from within the society itself and to assert alternative forms of political, social, and religious identity against fascist political currents is by no means an imperial act, but is rather a radical act of social justice. Rauna Kuokkanen notes a semantic distinction, used by the International Indigenous Women's Forum (FIMI), between “harmful traditional practices” and “violence in the name of tradition”, which I think illuminates the realization that I experienced while listening to Dr. Raghuvanshi and other people at the PVCHR (Kuokkanen 2014:133).

While the work of the PVCHR began as an advocacy group for low-caste peoples it has grown to include intersectional initiatives working against neoliberal capitalism, nationalism, and fascism, towards supporting justice for women, Muslim minorities, children's rights to education and food, labour groups such as auto-rickshaw unions and weaver's cooperatives, and victims of police torture, to name a few (PVCHR 2011). The PVCHR are just one example of grassroots organizations around the world working to enact change where the official avenues fail to deliver justice to marginalized groups. While I remain skeptical about some of the “official” mobilizations of human rights discourse I believe that the language of human rights can offer a framework for grassroots social justice struggles.

- Thomas Seibel


Burke, Edmund. 1852. The Works and Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, Volume 7. London: Francis and John Rivington.

Human Rights Watch 2016. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/03/11/un-human-rights-council-general-debate-ending-discrimination-based-caste-and-descent

The Kashmir Scenario. April 13th, 2013. “The need of the hour is to create new dynamics and debate within India: Lenin Raghuvanshi”. URL: http://thekashmirscenario.com/2014/04/13/prominent-activist-co-founder-peoples-vigilance-committee-human-rights-pvchr-lenin-raghuvanshi-conversation-mushtaq-ul-haq-ahmad-sikander-early-life-influences-work-h/

Kuokkanen, Rauna. 2014. “Confronting Violence: Indigenous Women, Self-Determination, and International Human Rights”, in Indivisible: Indigenous Human Rights. Joyce Green, ed. Fernwood Publishing: Halifax.

The Starphoenix. March 15th, 2016. “Graphic video shows Indian 'untouchable' hacked to death after marrying upper-caste woman”. URL: http://thestarphoenix.com/storyline/graphic-video-shows-indian-untouchable-hacked-to-death-after-marrying-upper-caste-woman

PVCHR 2011. “Call for a neo-Dalit movement to overthrow feudalism, neo-fascism and neo-liberalism through a popular action”. URL: http://www.pvchr.net/2011/07/call-for-neo-dalit-movement-to.html

Saturday, February 13, 2016

Student Blog #4: A Critique of “Pop Culture Feminism”

While I was walking to class recently, I noticed the cover for that week’s edition of the Sheaf, the University’s student newspaper.  The cover had a photo of the famous World War II propaganda poster “Rosie the Riveter” on it, which had encouraged women’s participation as workers in war industries; except Rosie’s face had been replaced with Taylor Swift’s. Since that moment, I’ve been thinking about the piece, called “In Defense of Pop Culture Feminism.” I’ve been thinking about it so much that I believed a response piece was necessary.

The author of the piece claims that feminism is on the rise in part because celebrities like Emma Watson and Taylor Swift are identifying as feminists. She argues that this is important for the feminist movement, and that “serious” or “academic” feminists need to stop bullying Taylor Swift for her so-called “watered-down feminism.”

First, I take issue with her distinction of “’serious’ feminists,” as though the inclusion of feminist theory in academia is a bad thing. Gloria Steinem, an American radical feminist and journalist, who has expressed rather problematic opinions in the past, has said: “nobody cares about feminist academic writing…these poor women in academia have to talk this silly language that nobody can understand in order to be accepted…knowledge that is not accessible is not helpful.” Many philosophers use this elevated language – Kant or Noonan come to mind – and many of us struggle with their density to the point of frustration. But has anyone ever called them “silly,” or implied that they’re just trying to keep up with the Big Dogs of academia? I am aggravated by the suggestion that feminist theory should not be adopted in the philosophical canon because it is important critical theory in all fields. To criticize those who endeavour to advance the field with scare-quotes on “serious” feminist issues is to further divide the study of feminism in academia. Yet, the author praises pop-culture feminists for supposedly bringing feminists together.

The author further clarifies that pop-culture feminism is “based around ideas of girl power, female solidarity, and that feminism is for everyone.” The author also notes that while pop-culture feminism is deserving of critical analysis, it is valuable in that it makes gender equality appeal to the masses. On its base level, feminism is for everyone. To be sure, that is an important point. Yet, if that’s true, someone should remind Taylor Swift that identifying as a feminist means feminism is for women of colour, women who are not able-bodied, women who are impoverished, transwomen, etc.

I am, of course, assuming that the author did not do an in-depth search of why pop-culture feminists like Taylor Swift face an enormous amount of criticism within contemporary discussions of feminism. Taylor Swift, with the status that she has, has an extremely loud voice. And she has used it, time and time again to dismiss feminist issues that do not directly service her exact type of (tall, white, slim, blonde) “girl power” and “female solidarity.” Other than culturally appropriating in her music videos (see: Wildest Dreams), or glamourizing abusive relationships (see: Blank Space), I can tell you about one important example. Last year Nicki Minaj called out the music industry, arguing that “black women influence pop culture so much but are rarely rewarded for it.” She is very clearly pointing out systemic racism and sexism in the music industry directed against black artists. In short, Nicki Minaj is using her powerful voice to speak for many who don’t get the chance. Taylor Swift, by contrast.  nominated for the award Nicki Minaj believed she was snubbed for, hit back: “I’ve done nothing but love and support you. It’s unlike you to pit women against each other. Maybe one of the men took your slot.” Um, this wasn’t about you, Taylor Swift!

The author of the Sheaf article further clarifies the position from which she writes this article: “I am a white, straight-passing, middle-class, cisgender woman. I speak from a position of unearned privilege. I’ve never experienced discrimination based on my race, class or sexual orientation. Also, I’m a huge Taylor Swift fan.”

So I must ask, why is a “white, straight-passing, middle-class, cisgender woman” deciding what is and isn’t problematic within our understanding of feminism and feminist theory? Taylor Swift’s self-serving feminism is not intersectional, and it ignores the serious issue of racism in society, which in “serious feminist” terms would make swift a privileged and wealthy White Feminist. To support this type of ignorance is dangerous because as a white, wealthy woman within feminism, Taylor Swift has a powerful and elevated position. To exploit others in order to elevate herself, is to further diminish the voices of the women below her. Also, to exploit existing patriarchal structures within society – which encompasses sexism and racism – is to ignore these issues to to her own benefit. So when another white woman hails the “feminist” achievements of a White Feminist like Taylor Swift, it in turn diminishes the valid concerns of women of colour, who are given less of a voice already.

This was an extremely frustrating article to read. The Sheaf has a wide-reaching base within our University and I am concerned about the number of people who will be given the wrong idea about feminism after reading it. I agree that feminism should be accessible to everyone (if feminism excluded men completely, we would just be shouting into a vacuum). However, this inclusionary sentiment is necessarily challenged by intersectionalism, which is like feminism 2.0. Intersectionalism is the acknowledgement that feminism does not need to be about raising ourselves to the status of men anymore. In fact, men face a crappy deal due to patriarchy’s expectations of hyper-masculinity and aggression almost as much as women do. Intersectionalism acknowledges that feminism now needs to be about defeating patriarchal standards so that the most marginalized people in society can rise up, and that includes people of colour, people who are not able-bodied, people who are impoverished, LGBTQA+ people, etc. To look at power systems that reward white, slim, able-bodied women like Taylor Swift (who no doubt work very hard) but to question why these systems don’t in turn reward people who look much different that Swift, yet work equally hard (if not more so given the obstacles faced) is essential.

Is this to say that no celebrity can be a good feminist role model? Absolutely not. I do agree that young feminists should have someone to look up, to make feminism “cool” and “accessible” but not to simplify it. Rowan Blanchard, a young Disney Channel actress and great pop-culture feminist has noted: “feminists issues include sexual assault, rape, abortion, Planned Parenthood, domestic violence, equal education, and the wage gap…many [White Feminists] have not accepted the fact that police brutality and race issues are our issues too…the way a black woman experiences sexism and inequality is different from the way a white woman experiences sexism and inequality.” I would genuinely like to see Taylor Swift make an acknowledgement like this.

The author of this Sheaf article concludes that “the job of celebrities [isn’t] to be ‘good feminist activists.’ They’re entertainers. They’re here to sing, act, or market a reality show, not to be feminist scholars.” Wait, so which is it? Celebrities should be hailed for the hard work they do of bringing feminism to the masses? Or they should be praised because we don’t expect more from them in the first place? I’d have to disagree here and note that celebrity women aren’t brainless entertainers, dancing around a stage and incapable of a complex thought; women, even celebrities, should be capable of engaging in a conversation about feminism and social justice.

Everyone has the right to call themselves a feminist, and decide for themselves what that should mean. My issue, however, arises when celebrities use this position of power to further advance themselves at the cost of others.

- Raquel Alvarado

Monday, February 8, 2016

Student Blog #3: Racism and Social Justice

We often overlook the large amounts of social injustice and racism in our everyday lives until something brings it to our attention. Recently I received a gentle reminder of this at a popular hotel downtown Saskatoon. My two friends and I were entering the hotel on a Saturday evening at the same time as a young aboriginal couple. While we all stood waiting for the elevator, a security officer approached the group and began to ask the couple their first and last name, while writing everything down on a piece of paper. At first I thought that this may be just protocol to document visitors of guest, but then the security officer left without taking any other names. I was shocked at how someone could be so blatantly prejudice and not even see anything wrong with it.

Sunday, January 31, 2016

American election season

As the American election season officially begins tomorrow, many progressive voters seem excited about the Bernie Sanders campaign.  Outside of the United States, Sanders looks like a fairly mainstream social democrat, but inside the country he certainly seems like an aberration of the American political tradition.   That being the case, I was fascinated by this recent piece on one of the American founders, Thomas Paine.  Clearly there is an intellectual radicalism within the American tradition, which Sanders seems to be channeling.  Fascinating stuff in an otherwise bleak and scary election season inside America.  

Thursday, January 28, 2016

Student Blog 2: Health Care Inequality for Women

Inequality in the health care system just does not happen in the United States or in other countries that does not have a universal health care system. Health care inequalities are happening right here in Canada too.  Health care inequality just does not happen to other people, it happens to women like you and me every day.

When I was in my 20s I got sick, I mean really sick.  I was seeing more doctors then my 70- something year old Granny.  At this point in my life I had worked as a health care aide for about six years, so I thought I knew how the medical system worked.  However, my time as a health care aide did not prepare me for the inequality that I would face as a female patient.
By design our health care systems gives doctors (and to a lesser extent nurses) all the power in the delivery of healthcare.  It is truly amazing the power that doctors hold over someone else’s health. Patients really have little say in how the medical system treats us and/or our bodies.  Patients are taught from an early age not to question doctors or nurses and not to second guess the quality of our care. In my experience, many doctors see their patients as a commodity that they need to treat as fast as possible in order to make the most money from the health care system.

When I got first sick, I truly believed that doctors were there to help me. However I quickly learned that this was not the case.  I was often treated like I was dumb, and when I pointed out how bad my lab results were I would be told that it really did not mean anything.  If continued to push for the results, I was told that my medical problems were caused by stress and that I should see a therapist.  I had little power in these appointments and I often left the appointment thinking maybe I was crazy.
I remember one time leaving an appointment and going to a friend’s house crying because I felt so belittled by the latest doctor.  I was telling her and her mom what happen and they told me that this is what happens in our medical system.   My friend said all women are treated like this, and her sister who has MS, was told she was crazy on multiple occasions by multiple doctors before she was diagnosed correctly.   After this I started asking other women about their health care experiences and many of them had similar stories: many women had been labeled crazy by a doctor.  This is when I truly started to understand that women are treated differently than men in our health care system.  I also learned that if you added any other labels in front of woman such as young, poor, immigrant, and/or minority your health care experience was often worse than my bad experience.
When I finally was given my official diagnosis, it was not the victory I thought it would be.  It was just another way to show me that I was powerless and that women’s health in general was not a priority in our health care system.  My diagnosis was not given in person or over the phone, it was sent to me in a letter, where the doctor wrote that my tumour was of no concern; except it was of concern, this little tumour was affecting my life, my overall health and it was affecting my marriage.

 I called to make an appointment with the doctor, to discuss this matter and I was told she did not want to talk about it and when I asked if I could get a second opinion, I was told,” no and that the matter was closed.” After hearing this I knew I need to find a doctor that cared about me and my health. I was lucky my husband’s job allowed us to move and I was able to start over in another health care system in another province.

The new health care system still had the same power dynamics at play, but this time I was older and wiser and I knew how the system worked.  I had also learned how to work the system.  I also made sure I found a family doctor that was female and who understood how my tumour was impacting my life, health and marriage.  I remember explaining to her at my first appointment that I was not crazy, that I was sick because of this little tumour that was of no concern. I am not sure if it was because she was female, or if it was because she was knew to the Canadian health care system, but I found a doctor that care for me and would spend her own time looking for the best specialist to take  care of me.  With my family doctor’s help, I finally was able to receive the medical care and surgery that I needed.

Today I run a support group, and one of the things that many of the women tell me is that they were not prepared for was how they are treated by doctor, nurses or the medical system in general.  Many of the women tell me that they feel like second class citizens in our universal health care system and that every test, appointment, procedures was/is a fight to get.

-Debra Kulcsar

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Student Blog Post #1 W2016: Global Capitalism and Democracy

Towards the end of the first chapter of James Cairns and Alan Sears’ “The Democratic Imagination,” the authors describe the application of the globalised paradigm of neoliberal capitalism through the spread of westernized systems of democracy.  Regarding the opportunity for development of greater political stability in Libya in 2011, Barack Obama noted “even as we promote political reform and human rights in the region, our efforts cannot stop there.  So the second way that we must support positive change in the region is through our efforts to advance economic development for nations that transition to democracy” (21).  
Cairns and Sears temper Obama’s purported motives of selfless intent with perspectives of economists who point out that the advancement of democracy internationally also provides supportive conditions for self-interested western nations to increase their GDP by means of increased export, bolstered by stable and reliable governmental institutions including courts, an independent judiciary, and rule of law (21).  In addition, although economic development in the form of industrialization allegedly leads to greater quality of life for citizens in impoverished nations, it also conveniently alleviates the responsibility of more prosperous western nations to provide foreign aid, whether directly or through contributions to the United Nations or other NGOs.  
An example of a case study that illustrates the damage of an emphasis on capitalist democratic politics to the detriment of liberal human rights (or really any structure which could be called “ethical”) is the garment industry in the Global South.  No longer called the “third world”, the Global South has been collectively redefined as “developing” or “underdeveloped” countries.  The self-centeredness and egocentrism underlying the agenda of western nations in their overseas promotion of democracy becomes apparent when one asks whose definition of “development” is being prioritized.  For example, Jeff Noonan discusses the life-blindness of money-value growth as measured by quantifiable data such as GDP that conceals the practically unrestrained environmental damage caused by capitalistic economic growth (142).  This is especially true in the global south where industry regulations can vary from being loosely enforced to practically nonexistent.  Simply put, it is more convenient for western nations if the environmental degradation inherent in modern industrial practices is relegated in the far-off global south.  In relation to the textile and garment industries, the amount of chemical waste and polluted water and air is enormous, with the World Bank estimating that the textile industry alone produces 20 per cent of all global industrial water pollution.  Such an emphasis on “development” conceals the fact that such practices are not authentically in the best interest of said nations’ inhabitants.  
Solutions for sustainable economic growth and local development which respect the integrity of the environment and human rights are considered impossible to implement if the residents of the Global South are to progress towards experiencing the same quality of life as westerners.  That is, quality of life as defined by access to a wide range of goods and services produced by a competitive local market or imported from the west, particularly consumerist domestic goods like cosmetics, clothing, food, and entertainment.  The cultural propaganda promoted within the content of such goods further reinforces narratives of the prestige of western democracy.  Thus, a common-sense western style of thinking dictates that the only option available for “developing” nations is industrialization since it opens additional avenues for export, reinforces the legitimacy and prestige of democracy, and prevents environmental damage from taking place within the borders of western nations.
Another benefit of western “development” is increased access to the inexpensive and easily exploited labour force of the Global South, which arguably has an even greater impact on its respective societies than environmental degradation.  In the garment industry, women primarily dominate the workforce due to structural issues of patriarchy worldwide.  Capitalist practices of ruthless exploitation in the garment industry add to the oppression by further subordinating them, especially in Muslim countries such as Bangladesh where women are conditioned to not have a voice.  
On a personal note, I’ve had the privilege of doing some research and writing on the topic of the female-dominated workforce in the textile and garment industry since the Rana Plaza collapse in Dhaka in 2013. I have talked at length with friends and family regarding the inhumane practices that are entrenched in the labour system due to a lack of international intervention for the promotion and securing of workers’ rights.  I’ve noticed when sharing information regarding the desperate working conditions of garment labourers that there is a point at which individuals tend to reach “maximum saturation,” indicated by a glazing of the eyes.  I’m guessing that this indicates that the individual is either overwhelmed with the horror of it all and is experiencing feelings of hopelessness, or, that they’re apathetic and don’t desire to have their belief system challenged regarding the westerner’s entitlement to cheap and disposable clothing.  Westerners have become accustomed to having access to inexpensive, disposable clothing for so long without asking questions or thinking about it critically that it’s become part of the cultural narrative.  
On the topic of the conflation of life-value and money-value in capitalism, Noonan writes:
the money-value system is the ruling value-system of liberal-democratic capitalist society.  As the ruling value-system it is the ultimate basis of legitimacy of both public policy and individual choice...This instrumentalization of life requirements and capacities is the basic structure of ethical harm in liberal-democratic capitalist societies.  Where policy and people mistake the growth of life-value for the growth of money-value, they can support policies or make decisions in their own lives which reduce life-value but increase money-value without noticing the loss of life-value” (144).  

The money-value system as the ultimate basis of legitimacy for individual choice is illustrated by the fact that I can purchase an exceptionally cute cream-coloured boho-inspired peasant top at H&M for $15 and not worry about it if it just sits in my closet or I throw it out because it’s so cheap.  I would argue that “cheapness” is the guiding rule for purchasing upheld by the vast majority of western consumers, and not whether the person who constructed the garment received a fair wage or worked in conditions that were reasonable.  I make this observation (at least on behalf of those who identify as women) based on the outrageous success of fast-fashion retailers such as H&M, Joe Fresh, Forever 21, Zara, Charlotte Russe, Bershka, Primark, Topshop, Uniqlo, etc.  But if cheapness is the only ethical standard informing our habits of consumerism, by extension, we are also making judgments regarding the value of labour for the individual who produced the garment, and ultimately, of their life-value (or lack thereof).
Following the Rana Plaza disaster in 2013, subsequent collapses and fires happened in Bangladesh in other factories, bringing some much-needed international media attention to some of the worker’s rights deficits in the nation.  Information on the complex situation of the garment industry is becoming harder to avoid, which means that hypothetically, the consumption patterns of fast-fashion shoppers should be evidencing development of an ethical conscience in alignment with increased awareness.  Following the 2013 disasters in Bangladesh, however, the fast fashion industry had its most successful year ever.  
So why do westerners abandon residents of the global south to their dreary futures?  In my estimation, it’s because of underlying beliefs of entitlement to western privilege based on imperialism.  If I were to translate this statement into a mathematical equation in order to depict this relationship in the reductionistic quantitative terms typically appropriated by capitalism, I estimate that it would look like this:

Whereas w = white people and b = brown people,  w > b

Although, to make the equation more accurate, there could be a number of variables that contribute to structures of consumption fostered by western privilege. Perhaps individuals feel that the west is entitled to reward itself for having attained a certain standard of living, or that they’re helping people in “developing” nations to obtain a higher standard of living, or perhaps they live under a rock and are not aware of the media attention that has been paid to Bangladesh in the past few years, or perhaps they are simply wilfully ignorant and refuse to acknowledge their role in a system that has and assuredly will continue to contribute to a system of human oppression.  Regardless, I think it would be appropriate for the international sphere to quit prioritizing western interests by labelling the global south a region of “developing” or “underdeveloped” nations, and use the more fitting label of “nations vulnerable to exploitation” or perhaps “habitually exploited nations.”  
At the domestic level, I repeat the words of Lenin in asking, “what is to be done?”  Bangladeshi workers who survived the tragedies of 2013 and were asked for solutions to the problem simply encouraged westerners to continue to purchase Bangladesh-made garments.  At the same time, a BBC documentary shot after the Rana Plaza disaster in 2013 recorded a male factory worker as saying, “after five hours of  sleeping, in the morning we have to get up at 5.  My mind doesn't want to do this, brother.  This, in fact, is inhuman.  Compelled, we are compelled.  We are prisoners.  We have to come."  Another documentary produced by the Australian Broadcasting Company in 2013 reported that there had been 43 factory fires in the past 18 months.  A Globe and Mail article from October 2013 reported that according to a national safety assessment performed by Bangladeshi engineers, approximately 90 per cent of Bangladesh’s garment factories are structurally unsound.  
The vast majority of textile and garment TNCs are well aware of the working conditions in Bangladesh but are unwilling to reinforce the vast changes needed to systems of labor through firsthand on-the-ground checks that ensure appropriate standards of building safety and labour practices.  A few have signed on to organizations such as the Bangladesh Fire and Safety Accord (BFSA), which provides a minimal structure of accountability by ensuring the structural stability and fire-preparedness of factories.  The Joe Fresh brand, which was heavily implicated in the Rana Plaza disaster for having subcontracted an order to the factory, resisted responsibility for weeks after the disaster, despite Joe Fresh clothing items being strewn about the wreckage.  They eventually signed on to the BFSA.  Minimal-intervention organizations don’t address numerous other continued violations of worker’s rights such as denial of work breaks, forced over-time, lack of access to plumbing facilities and running water, lack of ventilation, sexual harassment of women by male co-workers and overseers, and so on.  Perhaps, however, the evidence of a few fast-fashion companies signing on to the BFSA following the media blitz is a hopeful sign that collective action in the form of consumer pressure can produce change that moves in the direction of respecting the rights of workers.
My own solution has been to purchase everything I need or want from local second-hand shops.  I work at a consignment store, which makes it much easier for me to find what I need.  If I can’t find said items locally through the second-hand market, I try to find a product that’s made in a country where ethical standards of labour are enforced, such as in North America or Europe.  I’ve written to a few companies to tell them that I think they have ethical responsibilities that need to be fulfilled or to tell them that I appreciate them joining organizations such as the BFSA.  I figure the BFSA is better than nothing - it’s a start.  Despite the pleas of Bangladeshi garment workers to continue buying Bangladesh-made clothing, I don’t buy “fast fashion” anymore.  I recognize that for garment industry workers, this industry is their livelihood, but I’m also extremely reticent to support an industry that places individuals in such a difficult double-bind (you can be a working slave and make a tiny amount of money, or you can be unemployed and be free but possibly starve) and causes emotional anguish because of its oppressive practices.  
I would rather advocate for change through letter writing and spreading awareness rather than directly feeding into a system that ruthlessly exploits.  On that topic, I was thinking today about how I used to revel in my victory as a fashion hunter when I found a pair of basic black pants by Joe Fresh on the clearance rack at Superstore for a measly $3.  I’d reminisce with my woman friends about my “thrill of the find” and that I managed to get several years of use out of them.  It only dawned on me today as I started to write this piece - talk about western privilege.  An actual human being with as much intrinsic worth and as much capacity to feel and think as myself may have died for me to wear those $3 pants.  

-Courtney Bowman 

Social Justice and the Common Good is back in W2016!

St. Thomas More College's, INTS 400 Critical Perspectives on Social Justice and the Common Good is back for Winter 2016.  This year, we're featuring new readings on the environment, which includes reading Naomi Klein's, This Changes Everything and Pope Francis' Encyclical Letter with a strong focus on the good and the environment (Laudato si).  We will also be reading on a variety of local, national, and international topics including Indigenous rights, women's rights, LGBTQ rights, critical political economy and workers' rights.  As last year, we'll also be posting student blogs featuring their own observations on social justice and the common good.  Please feel free to contribute along with the discussion!

- Prof Smith