Debate! Debate! Debate!
A few posts ago, a reader brought to our attention the issue regarding our promotion of certain companies that treated their workers badly (i.e. Nike, Lacoste). This led to an interesting (and often heated) back and forth on our positions. I really enjoyed the debate. I love hearing from our readers, and this discussion wanted to share it with everyone else. I’m sure that a lot of people might have an opinion, so feel free to weigh in. Below is the “transcript,” see the original post here.
Lesser known but easily accessible by a simple Google search: Lacoste, like Nike and many other brands, still use sweathshop labor. I see your “mea culpa” (http://vegankicks.com/2010/06/mea-culpa-to-my-socially-conscious-readers/) was an empty promise.
Pretty disappointing, to be honest, that “cool” looking shoes should so easily redirect a moral compass. I don’t think quality over quantity is necessarily cliché, or inapplicable.
Best of luck with your blog.
Hey Nick,
I am sorry that you are disappointed about my blog content. I am a little puzzled, however, about the harshness of your tone. I don’t really know what I did wrong. I wrote that I would make an effort to promote socially responsible businesses, not that I would do so exclusively. So while I’m glad you are informing me and everyone else that certain brands do use sweatshop labor, that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop posting about them. I can’t really promise that. I hope you keep reading, thanks for your interest.
Peace,
Henry
Henry,
I suppose that I take issue with the fact that in your “About” section for your blog you state clearly that you are a “concerned vegetarian trying to discover and spread the good word on fresh, cruelty-free footwear,” though you seem to be pointing away from animal-cruelty with one hand while pointing—quite directly I might add—at human-cruelty with the other. I’m having a difficult time comprehending your motives for trading one form of oppression for another; I don’t entirely understand the detachment.
Now, I understand that you also state that, though “what you will see is mostly sneakers… I am liable to post about anything that pops into my scatterbrain,” but that seems like a cheap disclaimer to explain away this discrepancy.
The harshness of my tone is aimed at your influential position, coupled with a dizzyingly confusing standard of morals. As evidenced by your comments, you have a decent basis of regular subscribers that read your blog, many of whom most likely utilize your research into ‘vegan footwear’ as a vantage for deciding which shoes to purchase, and many of whom I would assume subscribe also to the vegan ethics that condemn animal-cruelty. I know that when I first stumbled upon your blog, I made the assumption that “vegan-kicks” would share a similar standard of ethics that most “vegans” maintain. Much to my chagrin, I was wrong. But that doesn’t mean that many people take the time to do the research that I have, because many may take it upon your good-graces and afford you benefit-of-the-doubt in thinking that “vegan” means free of oppressive manufacturing.
Now, whether or not you feel like you’re being influential, you’re providing a service that said subscribers may also assume is sufficient and thorough. I feel, however, that you greatly neglect the vast majority of vegan footwear and aim at many companies whom you are entirely aware are responsible for terrbile and reprehensible human rights violations, simply because they look cool. Your own morals are no concern of mine; if being kind to animals by being horrible to humans is your end-goal, that’s your prerogative—deplorable though it may be, you’re a step above the majority. But, when you start providing a service that is potentially misleading, than yes, I have a problem, and excuse my harsh tone.
I really have to ask, though: from what angle do you view animal cruelty as a serious problem that not only trumps human rights, but can exploit the latter in order to somehow correct the former? I am genuinely puzzled.
—Nick
Nick,
First of all, I want to thank you for compliment about me being in an “influential position.” No one has ever said that about me in my life, and it feels pretty good. While I’m very flattered, I think that may be overstating it. We have some readers, but not that many. We’re not about to make it on Ellen or Oprah. I blog about sneakers, man.
But onto your concerns. If I’m understanding you correctly, you think that I am inconsistent in my ethical code, condemning one type of cruelty (towards animals) while condoning another (towards laborers). In short, you think I’m a hypocrite.
First, let me repeat that this is a vegan-centric blog, not a human rights centric one. If it were, I’d say so. But I don’t. And when I say “cruelty free” I mean animals. I don’t think there is any confusion there. So, basically, I am not being misleading. Misleading would be saying “these shoes are sweatshop free” if I know they aren’t. As to the whole “vegan ethics” point, I think you’re generalizing and trying to speak for the entire vegan community. There’s no vegan standard of ethics. It’s absurd to even say such a thing. I’ve met vegans who don’t eat meat because they are weirded out by it, not because of any compassion towards animals. Certainly there are many an asshole vegan who doesn’t do right by anyone in their life. I’m not their voice, neither are you, and to assume that there is such a vegan code is false. Moreover, I would add that from my observations, other vegan bloggers and spokespeople don’t emphasize human rights – we are animal people. That, methinks, is a fair generalization.
Second, your moral absolutism is troubling. It is impossible this day and age to entirely avoid unscrupulous corporate behavior when promoting consumerism. First they say human rights, next it’s the environment. That’s a big one that we all missed. No matter how nice the factory is, the raw materials are still being dug out of an exploited community in an undeveloped country. The cotton is filled with pesticides, the other materials made out of god knows what. Eventually, it will all end up in a landfill somewhere, leaching harmful chemicals into the groundwater supply. By your reasoning, I should also look into the environmental practices of each shoe company I blog about. And then? There are surely other things I should keep an eye on. The more you pull the thread, the more the sweater comes apart, and this is the slippery slope you tread.
The fact of the matter is, we are all unwitting participants in the globalized economy. When you go to the store and walk away with something in your hand, you are potentially subsidizing human rights abuses. This goes for about ANYTHING YOU BUY. This is fact. So while we can argue all day about moral hypocrisy, we have to stop agonizing and make peace with some of the evils of this world. Of course, I think that sweatshop labor is a terrible product of our globalized society. Should we condemn the worst perpetrators of sweatshop labor? Yes. But am I going to stop buying stuff? No, I’m sorry. I can’t buy everything at American Apparel (their jeans are too skinny). It is noble undertaking to try and be good to everyone all of the time, but it’s just not possible. At least it’s not possible for me. So I apologize for that.
But Nick, I hear you brotha, and I am the choir. As I pledged before, I will try to shine a light on non-evil companies. I know they are out there. But I don’t necessarily know who they are. It is not my intention to ignore “the vast majority of vegan footwear.” My knowledge is limited. So this is why I posted on Jinga right after you told me about them. I’m not saying it’s your responsibility to feed me information, but it would be helpful. I can only say that I will try. Make an effort. It probably won’t satisfy you, but hey, you can’t make everyone happy right?
Hope this finds you in good spirits. I love the debate, and your passion gives me hope about the world.
-Henry
Henry,
I believe you’re blowing my intentions out of proportion; when I say influential, I am by no means implying that you are primed for a talk show, as you put it, but that your blog likely reaches more readers than you may otherwise assume. There are blogs I check multiple times a day that I’ve never once posted a comment to. The same goes for many people. I only commented to address a concern, and my subsequent posts have merely built off of the original. However, many people liklye browse your website when searching for “vegan options” for shoes daily.
Now, I’m not making assumptions about your ethical code, persay. What I am doing is trying to extrapolate some sort of justification for your ethics. I know many people as well who don’t eat meat and are ostensibly vegan, though not for moral reasons. But your “About” section does tout this blog as being about products that are cruelty-free. Generally, I would indeed make the assumption that vegans who are “animal-people” because they are appalled at the oppression and exploitation of animals—as the aforementioned statement implies of you as well—share a similar sentiment with human oppression. I didn’t realize that there was such a huge disconnect between the two. I agree that it is unrealistic to believe that every effort made towards non-participation in human rights abuses is successful, just as it is unrealistic to believe that, as a vegan, one has never accidentally eaten an animal product. But, if you have the power of will enough to change your life drastically to stand up for your morals, though the fight may not always be successful, I don’t think it’s unrealistic to chooses more than one battle at a time.
Consumerism is a problem for animal and human rights abuses alike. The vast majoirty of food as well as clothing and most all other products are fabricated by means of some sort of oppression, factory, sweatshop, slaughterhouse, dairy-farm, etc.. To be vegan for the intention of lessening the abuse of animals in the world may not stop the problem in its tracks, but every person who chooses not to participate is helping in some way, big or small. It’s the collectivity that allows a movement such as “veganism” to be as effective as it is, even if that isn’t very much. By shoo-shooing human rights abuses as something that is unstoppable, and willingly participating because, well, ‘out of sight, out of mind’—it is easy to just say, “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.” However, I staunchly disagree. I think that human rights abuses are equally as pertinent an issue, and—to run the risk of repeating myself—I don’t understand the disconnect between animal compassion and human compassion.
I agree that exploitation—animal, human, environment—is a slippery slope when choosing products to purchase. It’s seldom that one can find a product free of all three, let alone something that one may actually find appealing; thusly, I understand the intention of your blog. But there are a GREAT number of companies that take every precaution possible to make sure none of these occur that I have yet to see you highlight, save for Jinga of course. Inversely, there is a vastly greater number of companies who couldn’t possibly care less about all three, Nike for one huge example, whom you seem to highlight frequently. If Nike makes a “vegan” shoe, it’s coincidental, and the same goes for most of the big companies. They have no intention of making a “cruelty-free” shoe.
I would ague that it is indeed difficult to live in such a way that all of your purchases are as free from all forms of oppression as possible, but I would argue that it is not impossible. Even PETA acknowledges that a true vegan diet is almost impossible since you can’t oversee the production of every step of your food at every restaurant and every facility. But that doesn’t deter people from being vegan, it just makes people work harder. If everyone adopted the mentality of “it’s hard, so I’m just not going to try,” there would be no vegans searching for “cruelty-free” shoes, and you’d likely be out of a blog.
Sorry for the long winded response.
Best,
—Nick
Nick,
No need to apologize. Your comments are really good. Usually when I read blog comments (on other blogs, all our readers rule) they don’t seem to take the time to capitalize or check their spelling, and here you are with such well thought out and articulated insights.
Anyway, I think we are reaching the point of the discussion where we will reach a consensus or agree to disagree. I think we agree on most things. I nod to your argument about the gap between animals and people not being so far apart. Yes, it shouldn’t be a stretch to think that we as vegans/vegetarians should show some compassion to exploited people as well. And you’re right about effort; I think that if people are making the effort to find vegan shoes, they are probably willing to make the effort to find sweatshop free ones as well. I guess the upshot is to try your best with what you know. Unfortunately Nike is such a monster with sneakers that they gobble up all the interesting artists, and their releases get the most attention. It sucks admitting it as a fan of their stuff, but it’s true, which is why I guess I have a hard time ignoring them.
Tags:
16. August 2010 at 19:32
Wow. I did enjoy that little debate action, but I side with you, Henry. I must say that I am a little one sided on the animal right/human rights topic for this reason alone: humans can speak for themselves while animals cannot, which is why I do what I do. This does cause me to appear to care more about animals than humans, but I know that humans have the means necessary to speak for themselves.
17. August 2010 at 02:05
Interesting but like a broken record, I’ve had this conversation so many times! Like Tristan I am on your side and for the same reasons as Tristan, people CAN stand up for themselves, I know there are all the paying off the police stories and beatings and what not but humans can make their own decisions, whether they be tough ones or not.
Animals are systematically abused with no way to stand up for themselves, the ones that can stand up for themselves are generally abused far less, I’d like to see a lion milking farm.
As for using products that are made in sweatshops it is so difficult to avoid it. There’s no need for me to repeat all the stuff that Henry said but if I need running shoes I can go into any one of a million shops and try on a pair of Nikes to see if they are comfortable and fit properly, whereas I would have to order some hemp or whatever ones online, they would have to be transported to me (carbon emissions blah blah blah)they may not fit, they would cost far more than I can afford etc. This may sound lazy to your average human rights activist but I bust my ass trying to live free from animal products, my hands are full!
The ‘you care about animals more than humans’ argument is as old and boring as the Mac vs PC one!
TY
17. August 2010 at 02:19
Hi, I think vegankicks does a great job. It is primarly a blog about shoes without parts of animal (or human) bodies as raw material. It is for that enough to just give extra highlighting to shoes that score well in other regards to, like workers rights and overall environmental impact. The niche is narrow as it is. Better to keep your key focus and let other blogs focus on the other issues. Maybe you can add a disclaimer about that? I’m sure Nick and others can then themselves combine your data with that from other blogs when making overall ethically informed consumer choices.
17. August 2010 at 09:17
This blog is called vegan kicks not human rights kicks. I think that’s clear.
And your debate buddy hasn’t caught on to the fact that we don’t live in a perfect world.
I’d like to know which shoes are completely vegan and free of any exploitation of labour. I find it hard to believe that’s possible (in a true anarchist sense).
Do the people who read this blog even have full control over their own work life? That may seem like an exaggeration but to me it’s a difference of degree not kind.
People protested and some even died for a 40 hour work week in developed countries. So don’t act like it wasn’t a struggle…It didn’t come for free. Unfortunately, the developing world will have to go through the same kind of struggles. And it’s not all our fault.
Also, people choose to work in sweatshops because it’s a better option for them versus working the fields and starving.
So I don’t think the issue is that clear.
BTW, how are you debating someone on the internet? With a computer that was built where? how? and by whom?
17. August 2010 at 13:33
“BTW, how are you debating someone on the internet? With a computer that was built where? how? and by whom?”
Apple has been pretty transparent about factory conditions in the past 5(?) years to the extent of publishing annual reports.
Also…
“Also, people choose to work in sweatshops because it’s a better option for them versus working the fields and starving.”
Woof.
18. August 2010 at 06:02
I’ve been reading this blog for some time now to keep updated on “cool vegan sneakers”. Are some of the brands posted about not the most ethical out there? Sure. But that’s not why I read the site. I read the site to look at footwear and other items that aren’t made from animal products. Period.
I think the “cruelty free” mantra very clearly references animal cruelty, and not all cruelty in life. I mean, the page IS called “Vegan Kicks”… it pretty much highlights that very fact. And I don’t think by having a site about vegan sneakers the blogger is taking up the gauntlet to be the voice of all forms of cruelty. While that would be a very noble pursuit, it’s the perogative of the blogger to decide what he or she blogs about, and as mentioned above, it’s very clear that this blog focuses on animal free products. I think most readers understand that, and don’t have any other expectations about the blog. And I agree with the above posts that it’s undercutting the reader’s intellect to assume that the blogger has such overarching influence over us. I read the blog to find out if a sneaker is vegan. But like most other readers, I do my own research as well, although for the large part the posts are accurate (and when they’re not, they are quickly updated). I don’t have any other assumptions or expectations from this site, and it seems that the majority of readers don’t either.
So while I think it’s great that some vegans expect all other vegans to have concerns about animal friendly AND human friendly production methods, I don’t think everyone feels that way. I think if this was a site dedicated to ALL forms of cruelty free footwear, this would be another conversation. To be clear, I do agree with Nick’s underlying point of view that vegans should (at the very least) be more aware of exploitation of humans as well as animals, and I appreciate his compassion. But I (clearly) disagree with his other statements. The site is, and clearly is meant to be, a forum to discuss vegan shoes and lifestyle, nothing more, nothing less. And maybe this isn’t for me to say, but if you’re looking for something else, go somewhere else?
18. August 2010 at 10:27
Vegan means no animal products and not tested on animals- period. No matter how much certain people might want to twist the definition to suit their own interests, like trying to make it about being sweatshop-free, you just can’t change the definition of veganism. It bothers me because Nick’s arguments came across as being really holier-than-thou.
18. August 2010 at 19:00
Great point about the computers, Kay. I’ve only recently heard about the horrendous working conditions those workers have to deal with. And they are touching toxic materials with bare hands, to much greater hazard than textile workers. It’s just sad to find out sooner or later that everything we buy is tainted by exploitation somewhere down the line. Like I said before, one of the realities of a “post-industrial” globalized world. Sigh.
19. August 2010 at 09:37
Hmm.
I guess I really did have the assumption that more people cared about human rights violations. I’ve never once stated that veganism meant something that it doesn’t; I was trying to imply that people who tend to care about one form of oppression often care about another.
Animals indeed don’t have a voice, and it’s important to stand up for that as most everyone that commented above likely agrees, with possible exceptions (I don’t know anyone personally here). But I hope people realize that people in sweatshops don’t actually have voices either. Sweatshops are often not far removed from slave labour. Debt bondage is rampant, as is physical and verbal abuse, rape, murder, conditions so toxic that many people die from poor health and yes—as one commenter just pointed out—in some factories such as an Apple iPod factory, a few months ago a woman died of exhaustion after working over 30 hours without stopping.
I’m in no way trying to communicate a holier-than-thou attitude. But I don’t think it’s a bad idea not to support sweatshop labour.I really hope no one believes that people in sweatshops actually have a choice. I grew up and still remain a very privileged individual, living high enough above the poverty line that I’m afforded a great many choices in my life. I’m confident that most people on here are in similar, and in many cases better situations. Consequently, it’s hard to conceive of the degree to which labour is not a choice for many persons, and often times children, who are so deeply impoverished that sweatshop labour is not a choice, it’s a necessity. These factories are doing no favors and are paying far less than a living wage and forcing people to work—that really needs to be emphasized here, many people are actually forced or otherwise coerced upon threat of murder—in conditions that are uninhabitable.
In the US, Canada, much of Europe, and many other areas around the world, if we are being wronged, we not only have the opportunity and privilege, but the legal right to speak out and seek legal council to better our given situations and often times seek justice against those who have wronged us in some way. Many many many countries are not so lucky.
Once more, I’m not twisting the definition of veganism. I know what it implies, doesn’t imply, and I’m not about to argue otherwise. I’m just trying to understand the disconnect, and I’m still falling short.
It’s true that it’s nearly impossible to truly trust any company that says “our products are completely free of sweatshop labour, environmental degradation, and animal cruelty,” because there’s a lot of room for error and a chance the company is just not telling the truth in some instances. But vegans take this same chance every time we ‘trust’ a fake meat, a fake cheese, the ingredient list of any packaged food. How are we to know that it’s not all bullshit? We don’t, but we try our best anyway. And that’s all anyone can do. It certainly doesn’t mean that, since we can’t possibly know we shouldn’t try. Trying is what it’s all about.
Sorry if I offended anyone or came off as “holier-than-thou” as it was put. I’m honestly just trying to understand, not preach.
Best,
—Nick
20. August 2010 at 09:25
Really surprised that people are offended by Nick´s words. He´s simply putting out the fact that you Henry really should take that cruelty-free part of from your block´s about-section. Don´t get me wrong; I really do enjoy reading your block and find out new vegan shoemodels. I can then choose to ignore those shoes that are manufactured by companies without ethic and find out more about those cool shoes that are truly manufactured cryelty-free.
A hint to you Ty; New Balance makes lots of vegan running shoes and they are all manufactured in Great Britain (so no sweatshops are used in making those).
Normaly you get in to a debate about values with meat-eating people who don´t get that I simply don´t see no difference between their dear pet (that they feed and take care like human child) and livestock. I mean that I value the life of them both highly. People get angry to me when I propose (as an example of human cruelty towards livestock) to close their dear cat or dog to smal box for a year so that we could feed it to grow as big as possible and then have a great meal made from it.
I believed that vegetarian people usually have more empathy towards life in any form. I guess it isn´t so. How some of you simply ignore the cruelty towards humans meanwhile thinking animal rights. Would it be then just easier buy those Nikes with leather in them because then the selection of different cool shoes multiply with hundreds. Don´t get me wrong in here either; Nikes looks really nice.
And finaly about people in sweatshops. Nick pointed right there that they really don´t have voice. For the most part they don´t have choice. Many of them truly working as a slaves. -Yes, even this modern time. So I urge you readers of this block (and you Henry also) to find out how most of clothes and shoes are manufactured and by whom in what contitions and whit what wage. -It´s not really that hard. And haven´t most of you already done some investigation about animal´s contitions? Study by the same methods, just change the object.
I pologize my spelling. English isn´t my native language.
Peace and love to you all,
Juha
23. August 2010 at 01:14
Thought I’d put the point across in favor of Sweatshops. http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2008/Powellsweatshops.html
“Economists across the political spectrum have pointed out that for many sweatshop workers the alternatives are much, much worse.1 In one famous 1993 case U.S. senator Tom Harkin proposed banning imports from countries that employed children in sweatshops. In response a factory in Bangladesh laid off 50,000 children. What was their next best alternative? According to the British charity Oxfam a large number of them became prostitutes.”
23. August 2010 at 08:29
Nick: “guess I really did have the assumption that more people cared about human rights violations.”
I object to that statement. To prefer that this blog keeps focusing on footware with no animal-derived raw materials DOES NOT imply not caring about human rights violations. There are many other blogs, organizations, publications and so on that cover workers’ rights issues. Every reader here is free to read BOTH this blog AND any number of such sources. Please drop insinuations like that Nick, because they only pollute the good parts of your message.
Juha: “And haven´t most of you already done some investigation about animal´s contitions? Study by the same methods, just change the object.”
Look, Henry provides the great content of this blog free of charge and out of his own effort in his free time, like most bloggers do. We should be thankful for that. To research all shoes from both a vegan and a workers rights perspective would, I suspect, double the time Henry must spend on making each post.
None of us writing comments are in any position to make demands (or insinuations) that Henry should spend much more of his free time to research additional issues. If YOU want such information for all posts why not do the research yourself? Do some workers rights research on all shoes Henry posts about and tell the rest of us about it in the comments section. In short, ask not what Henry can do for you, ask what you can do for Henry and the rest of us!
23. August 2010 at 16:01
Just came to correct incorrect information that I posted here. New Balance aren´t made in the Great Britain. Actually New Balance is an American company. There have been some allegations over worker rights in some of their overseas factories. But you can buy running shoes that have been made in the USA; 25% of New Balances sold in USA are made in their USA factories and they have list about shoes made in USA on their webpage: http://www.newbalance.com/usa/#/factories
-Shoes are shown in the bottom of that page.
Both of vegan New Balances that Henry here (http://vegankicks.com/2010/05/new-balance-m587nv-wr883cu/) introdused can be found in that list. So there you go Ty; vegan running shoes made cruelty-free in USA.
I´m going to get back to your post soon Joel, as well as yours X. I first have to get some material to show you so that I´m not just preaching.
26. August 2010 at 07:53
X,
Churrrrch! I appreciate your kind words and support. What you say is true. I am only a part-time blogger and do this in my free time. While it is very rewarding, it does take some energy to research and update. Plus as a young professional trying to get his career off the ground, I can allocate only so much time to this endeavor.
I skirted this subject, but you are right, I will have to spend even more time to do the necessary research on fair trade stuff, and the blog could suffer as a result. First, dedicating more time to researching human rights issues takes more time away from updating, which I feel is the most important thing when doing a blog like this. Second, as another reader admitted to me in an email, focusing on fair-trade shoes would severely limit the variety of content, and take away from the overall fun-ness of it all.
I have been receiving great info from you guys, and I will be posting more on fair-trade goods in the near future, but the overall look and feel of the blog will remain the same. If you need to make sure that the companies I promote are not abusing worker’s rights, then I suggest you do your own due diligence on it and let me know if there’s anything I should be aware of.
Thanks for all the comments!
Peace out,
Henry
16. December 2010 at 01:03
Nick, I wish I had the will power to live life the way you do, although you are a giant douche. And Henry, thanks for posting this. This was a very interesting and eye opening debate.