Although legal slavery has been abolished in almost every country in the world, Bales points out that it has not disappeared but that
the old definitions and notions of ownership and its (economic) responsibilities are no longer in keeping with modern business management techniques.
Having analysed contemporary configurations of traditional slavery in Mauritania, modern slavery of prostitutes in Thailand, Brazilian charcoal burners
and debt slavery in Pakistan and India he sums up: “The new slavery mimics the world economy by shifting away from ownership and fixed asset
management, concentrating instead on control and use of resources or processes. Put another way, it is like the shift from the “ownership” of
colonies in the last century to the economic exploitation of those same countries today without the cost and trouble of maintaining colonies. Transnational
companies today do what European empires did in the last century - exploit natural resources and take advantage of low-cost labor-but without needing
to take over and govern the entire country. Similarly, the new slavery appropriates the economic value of individuals while keeping them under complete
coercive control - but without asserting ownership or accepting responsibility for their survival. The result is much greater economic efficiency: useless
and unprofitable infants, the elderly, and the sick or injured are dumped.”
Due to this shift in emphasis, this dematerialisation, companies are much more conceptual, capital more nomadic, in essence. They no
longer seek to own the land and factories as a foundation for production, but are under pressure to reduce ownership (and commitments) to the minimum
by outsourcing everything possible. |
 |
Thus having contracted for sport shoes of a specified design, material and quality, the company can sit back and deny all knowledge
of the pay, work conditions and abuses which take place in sub-contractual fulfilment of those orders.
|
Naomi Klein gives many examples in her book No Logo: “Disney spokesman Ken Green gave an indication of the depth of this shift
when he became publicly frustrated that his company was being taken to task for the desperate conditions in a Haitian factory that produces Disney
clothes. ‘We don’t employ anyone in Haiti,’ he said, referring to the fact that the factory is owned by a contractor.” |
