In your opinion, does this effectively amount to slavery?

Question

US and European companies own massive land concessions in the northern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo. They exploit the easy supply of cheap labour there, paying as little as $2 per month for working 6 or 7 days per week. The workers literally have nowhere else to go; they are kept in desperate conditions. If they try to speak out or protest, they're fired and perhaps arrested. Their average life expectancy is 40 years. They die of malaria, tuberculosis, diarrhoea, malnutrition. These logging plantations have been operating ever since the the era of Belgian colonial rule. They continued after Congo's independence (when their popularly elected nationalist president Lumumba was assassinated by the Belgians and the CIA and replaced with US-friendly Mobutu) and continue to operate till this day. The companies claim that they are providing the workers with housing, education, health care, transport, etc. but in fact the housing are just bare structures and the schools have no books except bibles. These conditions are all sustained by companies from all over the 'developed' world, and we consume the products of this slavery on a daily basis.

If you have an hour to spare, listen to this interview with journalist Keith Harmon Snow, who visited these plantations in the Congo. He names some names, and also talks about why we don't read/hear about this in the mainstream media:

http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=19907

Answer 1

   Of course it's slavery, and how about China. I read today where the Chinese were only paying 280.00 a month to the skilled labor that were buidling all the olympic buildings. And now they kicked the migrant workers out of the city so the world won't see them in their hardhats and shabby clothes.

Answer 2

It is plain and simple I watched most of it

simply horrible...

Answer 3

Thank God for the American Labor Unions. Thank God!!

If we left it up to corporations, our wives would be on their knees every payday as compensation for being allowed to work at their corporation.

Answer 4

The love of money is the root of all evil.

Answer 5

Olivegal: What you do not seem to understand is that without the US and EU is that those people would be living a smaller insignificant life under that country rule.

Do you know of any history on the DRC? That its governement is completely unstable.. wars... internal fighting... slavery... and U.S. involvement in the assination of Lumumba is assumed, not fact so make sure you state that as an opinion!

The UN and US have on several attempts have tried to help stabilize the country with little success. Belgium is a long standing STABLE entity... why fight to remove the only thing that is constant and stable there atm? And the friendly Mobutu? You obviously have no idea about fact searching do you?

Mobutu, the army chief of staff, ousted Kasavubu and started privatizing most of the mining (largest income provider for the country), murdered any opposition to win the election in 1970, barred religion from schools, continued to privatize most of the economy, and changed the name of the country to Zaire... among other things. Until Kabila's guerrilla movement in 1997 ousted Mobutu but not before he completely destroyed most of DRC's economy and siphoning off millions to ensure his lifestyle else where. Zaire was renamed to Democratic Republic of Congo as it was originally BEFORE Mobutu.

In 1998 Rwanda and Uganda marched troops into DRC for the sake of Kabila's lack of restructure plan for DRC. Much of DRC fell under control of Rwanda and Uganda until Angolan, Namibian, and Zimbabwean troops came to Kabila's aid.

Doing a bit more research you can fill in blanks and add a mountain of detail to this as well. So back to your question...

You blame US and EU for slavery? You think we should march in and add more conflict to a conflict ridden country? The simple fact, is that $2 a month is probably more valuable then 10lbs of gold to us. You are compairing your standard of living with theirs and they are on two completely different planes.

Sure... maybe we should move into this unstable country, spend billions of dollars (from your taxes remember) creating an infrustructure, increasing their value of life only to have some coupe or rebel force overthrow the government again.. march in a destroy or take all of that way from them and us. But making one little area prosperious you are just asking for someone to come in and take it for themselves in that area.

You can not speed up progress. You can only give it little encouraging pushes in the right direction and wait for a break through. Africa is a very war torn area with thousands of different rebel groups. They have to become united before any major progress is made. Sadly :(

Slavery? No... but more like small pushes to hopefully encourage progress.

EDIT:

I stand corrected. Sorry, but about 90% of the time ignorance runs rampid on these things. And by no means am I an African studies major. But international business is my major so I've learned research is best done on your own unless you want someone elses interpertation.

- Yes the declassified documents state that he was a CIA target. It does not mention the fact they carried out any tactic that placed the CIA in direct responsibility of his assassination. Though there are some other reports I have found that link the US in supporting the overthrow. Which is responsible for murdering Lumumba.

- Yes Mobutu was a cold war "client" of the U.S. But I'm sure he was playing that card to keep himself in his current position and have the US provide him with weapons to fight his war. The Cold War caused many political shifting games played by many sides.

- Zaire might have been "stable" in simple terms but only for the fact that Mobutu held the confidence and support of the military. Like all dictatorships... the military follows the money which in which Mobutu ensured he had by taking it from the economy and labor. Stable is not the word I would use for such a corrupted government.

- I still stand by my point that you can't force a country to develope beyond its means. Its unstable and for right now.. these corporations are providing somewhat of a job for what other wise would most definitely be slave labor. If you had to live there... who would you rather be a slave to? The companies or the rebels?

How would you recommend these companies to fix the problem?

Answer 6

Not every place has ideal conditions, nor unions, and the survival factors are all that are necessary for any society. WE in america have it so easy that we don't understand why every one shouldn't have a three bedroom home and at least two cars, and the latest in electronic toys for our kids. Life is not that utopian and there are harsh conditions.Even in america there are those who can't live the great dream, but they too survive.It was not that long ago that children worked in sweat shops or mines in this country , or worked long hours on a farm to just get by, and they didn't have school books because they didn't need an education to do the work. What we have today is a phenomenon created after the second world war and our scientific community making advances in all the fields of science.

Answer 7

As long as their is money involved their will always by slavery in one form or the other. In america slavery still exist. Most americans are in debt, so basically they own nothing someone else owns it.  

Answer 8

Slavery is like so last century : 0 if you have to ask if it amounts to slavery I can say that even if it isn't  pure slavery its probably at least waaay wrong

Answer 9

it is slavery, but we are all slaves in some way.  we must live in the societies provided to us, if we choose to rebel we are punished.  all the land is purchased and bordered, we can't go anywhere.