In class, my group was on the opposition side of the argument, which was to stop using technology that was produced through slavery. I personally chimed in with a thought about if it not be technology it be clothes, or toys, or almost anything that we use. From slavery to sweatshops the unfair treatment of individuals to produce what is popular among the masses is the foundation for almost everything in today’s society.

bangsweat

slavebrickpic12b

There was no clear evidence provided by the opposition side in class. The main argument that we made was that instead of completely dropping our technology now, we should wean off our devices until we had found a better option. We also gave the option that our government get involved, but not to the point that we start overthrows. We simply wanted our government to make a stand and at least attempt to stop the countries from using slavery as a technique for production and using slavery period. We thought that potentially the government would be able to step in and take at the very least, minimal action. Our rebuttal was the thought that completely dropping our current technology would lead to total chaos. It would cause so much civil unrest, that it would be a bigger problem for more of the world than a good solution to the problem at hand. Also, we thought that it would be necessary to start to move to other products that don’t use slavery for the production. That way the profit would go down for the pro-slavery companies and the alternative devices would get more attention and profit.

opinion

In my opinion I feel that the governments of the countries that are under the provision of the legal conventions and treatise should step in and attempt to stop the slavery. I feel that it is their priority to try to stop it. They joined in on these agreements fully understanding what their obligation was. It is their duty to be the ones to make the change. If they cannot make the change, they can at least start it. I’m sure that if all of the countries same together in support of one another they would have no problem stepping in. Once they got it started, I’m positive that their allies would help them if it came to that. That would probably be the best option, because there is no way that one person, 100 people, 1,000 people can make the change. I feel like it would take a host of nations willing to oppose and dispute the ideals and execution of slavery.

YWC

On the consumer end, I agree with my classmates in the thought that we should wean ourselves off of the technology that was produced by slaves until those companies felt the impact that it could have. We should resort to using the devices of companies who have had no history with slavery as their means of production. It would not only take away the aspect of slavery but it would also make the market more competitive. I feel that the only time when we as consumers should go back to those companies, if we do so, would be when they have removed themselves completely from using slavery and relieved themselves of the devices in an environmentally friendly way. While they would see a slight decrease in their sales the profit they could make, if consumers knew exactly how their devices were made, would probably be doubled.