Conflict Minerals: Consider this before buying a new electronic product.

[Dante]

I support the ideas in this thread. Consumers rarely take any blame for the evil in the world, it's always the responsibility of someone else, resulting in an interesting cycle.

The consumer blames the company saying,

"If the company does something evil, it's not my action as I'm not directly doing the evil, I'm just buying the product."

while the companies have their own rightful position,

"We're not doing evil, we're simply giving people what they want. If we were doing something evil, do you think anyone would actually support us? The consumers fund the action, we just do our job and build it for them."

Ethically, they both push themselves into a gray area so that nothing gets done and everyone feel comfortable. But our lives are not without consequence, what we choose to do will ultimately effect the lives of other people.

Alot of Christians would probably go off the deep end if someone claimed they were a Christian and had investments in the porn industry. Making money off such a thing seems unpalatable to them. But at the same time, I am of the opinion that a lot of the same people would have no problem buying a product that was created with materials acquired through unspeakable evils in the name of quick profit on an open market gone wrong - just as long as they don't have to hear about it.

Free markets are an excellent means to a better economy and world, but unless we actively take part in the process as consumers, choosing not only which products are cheapest or give us the features we want, but also respect life - then we are also investors in evil. Instead of gaining money directly (which many would criticize) we side-step the issue by simply "saving money" or "getting more bang for the buck" (which many would applaud). In either case however, whether you're directly buying shares, or buying stuff, you're making an investment in that company and all they stand for, and hence putting your stamp of approval on what they do - so far as you are aware. Whether high society deems it as appropriate should hardly be important, it's whether you deem it as appropriate.

It's important to remember that any truly free economy is an anarchy, governed simply by what people are willing to buy and sell. As we are aware, the anarchy is good in that we don't have a government owned economy like in communism - we are free to create, buy and sell as we please in a truly free economy (OK, so maybe we live in only a PARTIALLY free economy). But it also has a weakness, if others choose to take advantage of other people to get ahead in a free economy, and no one does anything about it. They will generally get away with it.

You can side-step it all you want. I'm not asking or expecting people to be the shining symbols of morality, but the consequences of those actions will be the same independent of what light they throw on it. For that matter, you can't say "we can do nothing for we're just a drop in a bucket", because the masses of stock holders that own these companies are also drops in a bucket. Remember, a share-holder owns a piece of the company, but shares none of responsibility for it's actions.

So if our choices are good, then it will be good, if they will be evil, then it will be evil. If the market as a whole is efficient at creating a better world, we will have one, if not, we won't. There is nothing saying that people create an efficient market, as there are plenty of examples of mass stupidity controlling what we buy and sell - so hey, maybe.

We're also used to thinking in terms of "not on my shores"; but economically, such systems are winning a place on the market for a reason. Slavery, murder and forced labor are cheap easy ways to make money. What could be easier then aiming a gun at a group of people and tell them to collect money for you or die? If such systems are economically favorable and people are willing to support the goods, then as a force it should grow on the open market.

If long hours and nill wages work to produce an economic boon in China and the market agrees to buy the products, then in order to compete, we must give Americans long hours and nill wages. If murder, rape and forced labor produce even cheaper gains and people are willing to buy it, then someone will generally be around willing to do it - both here and abroad. Unless we're all blessed as fortunate sons and daughters, the world we buy into is the world we will live in. And even then, we just put perfume over the muck we've dug ourselves into.

Once again, I'm not saying that I'm the shining star of morality. No one really can be in the current state of affairs, but unless we slow this train down, we'll never stop it and turn it around. And there is no point jumping on the morality train by claiming you're just a consumer - if you're buying the product and you think it will sell good, you may as well invest in the product and make money off it at the same time. But do make sure that what you choose to do fits with "you" and not with what society says is OK or not - because no matter the situation, we're always the ones responsible for our own actions, independent of who or what acts like it takes responsibility.

1) Talking about things is nice but action is better. This would be one way to actively and symbolically fight this problem.

2) While we cannot be held morally accountable for purchasing these items when we had no knowledge of what was going on, now that we know and are calling for action it seems to me that we should do something to pay for our ignorance in the past. So selling those nice Nintendo Wii's, Nintendo DS, Laptops, etc and then giving that money to help fight against this would be a great way to at least attempt to "atone" for our ignorance. Besides, material goods are just temporary and the real treasures are stored up in heaven so what's stopping us all?

So, whose with me?

Why don't we just all go live in grass huts and do nothing but pray all day every day.

Outside of the pray all day aspect, I've thought of doing that a few times. I've considered just "selling it all" and telling society to jump into it's pit of news-agnst driven despair that it seems to love. My biggest problem arises in that doing so would also take me away from people, so I couldn't ever form relationships or love others. Without love, the rest is meaningless and I wouldn't last a month with no company but my own imagination (been there, tried that, doing my therapy as we speak). The second issue is adaptation, we'd really have to figure out how to live and adapt in a completely new environment, entirely alien to the one we grew up in. But hey, if I ever evolve the concept into something better, mayhaps I have two new crazies who may one day jump on my boat of insanity.

Also, one other thing that will probably be a problem. I'm not rich enough to buy clothing made outside of China, and I don't know how to make my own, so unless either of you do, we're going to have to move to Oregon because that's the only state where public nudity is a protected right under free speech. Winter will be... interesting.

[Ante Bellum]

To be honest, I think this thread needs to back off with the attacks. It's not helping anything. In fact, it seems to be pushing people away from each other and the main issue the thread was made to discuss.
Another thing is, a lot of these ideas are difficult to work with. I can't afford to sell my computer and camera, much less give the money away and then find suitable replacements. I can't afford to make sure that my food, clothes, and electronics are all made with fair trade materials, especially after I bought them.
There's always the potential for suppliers to lie. Laws can't prevent it. The only way to determine this is to have a neutral, reliable third party thoroughly investigate the suppliers. Unfortunately, I don't have the millions it would take to ensure that my $10 secondhand Game Boy isn't made with "blood minerals."
Not that the issue should be ignored, but it's nowhere near is simple as it's being made out to be.
The world isn't going to be fixed in the next few years. That's too much to expect of people.
One more thing. Last I checked, God didn't just throw a few people onto the earth and say, "Okay then, I'm on vacation for the next billion years." It's not like He's going to ignore prayers, so why do I get the feeling that some people think they're worthless?

[Garland]

So, following the logic on this thread, it seems like I can't wear many of my clothes or use any computer, or even use light bulbs, since they are all made in China, which has slave-like labor conditions. It seems like we'd have to live on a desert island in order to completely follow this ideal. I appreciate the sentiment, but it isn't practical.

Also, a strong action like a boycott shouldn't be used unless you are sure that the company is actually engaging in conflict mineral trade.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I do not believe that love is practical. Christ wants us to transcend fairness and practicality ("you heard it said... but I say unto you") and instead embody love.

There's no sure way to solve everything. But we have to do what we can, Garland. Little progress is still progress.

[mechana2015]

I'm still wondering why silence and protection of corporate supply lines by companies such as Nintendo is automatically assuming they're doing wrong?

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I'm still wondering why silence and protection of corporate supply lines by companies such as Nintendo is automatically assuming they're doing wrong?

Their silence, to me, is reflective on their unwillingness to participate openly in terms of ethical practices or at least consider it as an important issue. The issue of human lives is more important than their own business policies.

So in this case, their silence is what is wrong. There is a large and unethical practice going on in Africa and companies like Nintendo have not commented. This is not to say that this means they have something to hide. But their unwillingness to speak about it is, to me, a sign of apathy. Until they willingly and openly make changes, I refuse to purchase their products and I will tell others to do the same.

[Yuki-Anne]

I want to be conscientious in my purchases. I feel a strong conviction that I ought to use my money wisely to glorify God as best as I can.

I also live on charity. And I live in Japan.

You might be able to see where I'm going with this; like Antebellum, I can't afford to get rid of everything I own that was made with conflict minerals or in sweat shops. Clothes here are expensive, far more so than in the states. The cheapest clothes I can find (which happen to be the only clothes I can afford, if I want to buy more than a few pairs of socks every month) are (probably) made in China. I have a hard time telling, because a lot of labels are written in Japanese. What am I supposed to do? They don't sell Tom's shoes here. The cheapest shoes I can find of a decent make are over $30. When you only have about $75 a month to spend on clothes, dishes, shoes, headphones... you know... "extraneous" stuff that most people don't think twice about before buying... it adds up really fast. Also consider that people are far more appearance-oriented here, and part of having a decent ministry means looking presentable.

I've been looking into electronics to aid my Japanese study. An Ipod Touch seemed like the best solution... and then I read this thread. I think I need an electronic dictionary. But I certainly don't want to fund rape.

But I live in Japan, and it's quite possible that I'm funding unethical business practices whenever I buy a cup. It's possible that the very cell phone I use in my ministry to glorify Christ was made with these business practices.

I'm bothered by this. I definitely won't be buying Toshiba or Nintendo in the future. But at the same time, I think the issue is far more complex than simply, "Don't buy these products."

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Oh I absolutely understand, Yuki. It's inescapable, which I did mention in my OP. But we must, nonetheless be aware of this and do all we personally can. Some people will be contributing more and others will be contributing less based off of needs. But the important thing is that we are all doing something about it. Whether you donate 5 dollars or 50 dollars to an organization. It's still a contribution. Again, what matters is that you are doing what you can. At the very least spread awareness.

And as a side note I actually caution against selling Toms Shoes. But that's another story.

[Cognitive Gear]

So, following the logic on this thread, it seems like I can't wear many of my clothes or use any computer, or even use light bulbs, since they are all made in China, which has slave-like labor conditions. It seems like we'd have to live on a desert island in order to completely follow this ideal. I appreciate the sentiment, but it isn't practical.

Also, a strong action like a boycott shouldn't be used unless you are sure that the company is actually engaging in conflict mineral trade.

Yes, you are correct about those things, but you would not need to live on a desert island. There are existent alternatives to the companies that produce those things. You can use the Shop with a Conscience Guide or simply shop at your local thrift store, such as Goodwill or Salvation Army. Most of us should be able to find some kind of thrift store no matter where we live.

So it usually is practical, it just isn't 100% convenient to how most of us live currently. It takes some effort to think about how to avoid it, but it really is the absolute minimum we can do to prevent suffering.

Also, it's not so much boycotting, as it is choosing services that cause less suffering. It should also be noted that this isn't the whole effort. We should also be donating what we can to people who can go out to physically help these people.

[Midori]

Ah man, my big nice post was at the bottom of the page. T_T But I'm glad this discussion made a turn for the better. Please don't let me see fighting happening again.

[Shao Feng-Li]

I never really know where to stand on these kinda of issues. Certainly I don't want to fund anything evil, but people happily defame big companies and make things sound worse than they really are and what not.

I mean, if Sony said "We give all profits to funding genocide" then yeah, I'd probably not buy from them. But really, I don't know what's true or untrue about these things.

[Rusty Claymore]

To broaden the spectrum here, I'm going to add another example: Alaskan Aerial Wolf Hunting. The practice of killing wolves from low flying planes. A lot of people think this act is unethical. Some of you may even take issue with it.
Well, if you buy a product that has rubber, or ride the bus, or have synthetic roofing tiles, or even buy dipping choclate, you may very well be supporting Alaskan aerial wolf hunting, because the Alaskan's who hunt wolves from airplanes have a high probability of being employed in the oil industry, and use the money they earn there to afford planes, rifles, and ammo.
I may be off in my example, but what I think is that if we all stopped buying gold and these other materials, would human trafficking stop? Would he lives really not be taken?
I'm sorry, but I don't think so. Boycotting oil will not stop aerial hunting. Why? Because there is a reason we hunt wolves from airplanes. Will boycotting these companies stop the actual crimes? I belive no, because the reason the crimes are committed. Simplistically it's because a lot of sick people are aloud to run around.
And realistically, how are even a lot of American consumers going to make a dent against China, who has been declared the worlds largest buyer of gold? This last World Magazine (Jan 29, 2011) has an article by Joel Belz talking about consumer boycotts. His subject is Apple's discision to revoke authorization of the Manhatten Declaration App. A lot of people think they should boycott apple for this, but Mr. Belz thinks it would be more effective to do it another way. I'm not very internet saavy so you'll have to look it up if you want to read it.

EDIT: Aaaaannnnnnd I'm late. Again.

[Davidizer13]

The bigger question we should be asking is this: Can we, as Christians, in good conscience, live a lifestyle that is dependent on the suffering of millions of other people? It's something I've wrestled with off and on. I just bought a computer a couple months ago, and on that alone, I've spent more money than what 40% of the world will make in a year, not to mention tuition and all the other things I spend money on without a second thought, every day. On top of that, there's all the hidden costs I'll never see (the effects of mining, CO2 emissions, the sweatshops needed to make them, etc.).

One idea I've heard that I really like is giving any money you make past a certain threshold to charitable organizations - the figures I've heard are in the range of $25-40,000, which is entirely reasonable for most Americans to live on. It's certainly not for everyone, but I'm willing to try it out, once I'm living on my own. That's the biggest constraint I've got right now against living to limit my impact on the world: since I'm still with my parents (at least for a few more months), I don't have much control over the everyday products I buy and seeking out ones that harm as little as possible, and that's a problem that lots of members here share.

[mechana2015]

Their silence, to me, is reflective on their unwillingness to participate openly in terms of ethical practices or at least consider it as an important issue. The issue of human lives is more important than their own business policies.

So in this case, their silence is what is wrong. There is a large and unethical practice going on in Africa and companies like Nintendo have not commented. This is not to say that this means they have something to hide. But their unwillingness to speak about it is, to me, a sign of apathy. Until they willingly and openly make changes, I refuse to purchase their products and I will tell others to do the same.

So what about the other major companies that were entirely unreported in the article you linked? Companies like Gateway, Cisco, Xerox, Kyocera, Nvidia, Epson, Nikon, ATI and ASUS?

Another question, would it be better to get a device from a yellow ranked company that lasts you for... 5-10 years, or get a device from a company with a slightly better record, but have to buy 3 or 4 in the same timespan?

[Cognitive Gear]

[quote="Yuki-Anne (post: 1455057)"]I want to be conscientious in my purchases. I feel a strong conviction that I ought to use my money wisely to glorify God as best as I can.

I also live on charity. And I live in Japan.

You might be able to see where I'm going with this]
Yuki, your situation is understandable. Obviously I have strong convictions about this whole thing, so I really think it is just important that we know what is going on, and make efforts to do what we can to limit suffering. One tactic I have heard that helps some people who cannot avoid products like these, but are convicted about their use, is that they attempt to balance the damage they feel responsible for with donations and help to those in need.

So by that measure, I don't think you should be too worried. You are out there, helping some people that other Christians don't have the ability to. Keep up the good work!

Maybe there are things you can do, but I think that the only person who can determine that is you.


Back onto the general topic of the thread:

I think that I should clarify what I am advocating. No, I don't think that it is practical, or even possible to stop using products that contribute to the suffering of others. However, I don't think the fact that there are some things that are entirely out of our control is any excuse to not manage the things you do have control over.

For example, I recently had a new windshield installed on my car. I was not able to choose the manufacturer, and even if I was I don't think that there are any online resources that would let me know if any of the major glass manufacturers use unethical practices. This is something that is entirely out of my control.

On the other hand, there are an abundance of sources for clothing that is both inexpensive and does not contribute to anyone's suffering. Aside from the occasional inconvenience of not buying that hat I saw on an impulse, this is an easy way to ease suffering.

Having no control over the source of the auto glass is no reason for me to suddenly give up on buying ethically made clothing. You could argue that I should just give up the car entirely, but that isn't an option where I live. It's one of those cases where what was once a luxury has turned into a necessity.

My point is, nothing starts out and automatically covers or fixes everything. It's one step at a time, and eventually you might be able to make a big change.

[Cognitive Gear]

To broaden the spectrum here, I'm going to add another example: Alaskan Aerial Wolf Hunting. The practice of killing wolves from low flying planes. A lot of people think this act is unethical. Some of you may even take issue with it.
Well, if you buy a product that has rubber, or ride the bus, or have synthetic roofing tiles, or even buy dipping choclate, you may very well be supporting Alaskan aerial wolf hunting, because the Alaskan's who hunt wolves from airplanes have a high probability of being employed in the oil industry, and use the money they earn there to afford planes, rifles, and ammo.
I may be off in my example, but what I think is that if we all stopped buying gold and these other materials, would human trafficking stop? Would he lives really not be taken?
I'm sorry, but I don't think so. Boycotting oil will not stop aerial hunting. Why? Because there is a reason we hunt wolves from airplanes. Will boycotting these companies stop the actual crimes? I belive no, because the reason the crimes are committed. Simplistically it's because a lot of sick people are aloud to run around.
And realistically, how are even a lot of American consumers going to make a dent against China, who has been declared the worlds largest buyer of gold? This last World Magazine (Jan 29, 2011) has an article by Joel Belz talking about consumer boycotts. His subject is Apple's discision to revoke authorization of the Manhatten Declaration App. A lot of people think they should boycott apple for this, but Mr. Belz thinks it would be more effective to do it another way. I'm not very internet saavy so you'll have to look it up if you want to read it.

EDIT: Aaaaannnnnnd I'm late. Again.

I just have a couple of things to say in response to this:

1) Animals are not the same as human beings. While I do find animal cruelty (I have never heard of this particular controversy before, so I am assuming that about this) to be unethical, I don't think that it needs the same level of attention as human suffering.

2) These situations are different. Human beings hunt for fun. Corporations only act because it is the most profitable thing to do. Make it less profitable, and they will change accordingly.

[ST. Attidude]

Haha!
Microsoft trumps Apple.

While I feel more relieved that every computer in our house came from a company that shows effort in this cause, I now also feel a little weird that almost every printer in the house is from a company with the pole opposite reaction.

[Nate]

Ah man, my big nice post was at the bottom of the page. T_T

I see you feel the pain I felt earlier. It's such a bummer.

I may be off in my example, but what I think is that if we all stopped buying gold and these other materials, would human trafficking stop? Would he lives really not be taken?

Right, but you can take that to its logical extreme and then you end up with the problem I mentioned earlier. "If I volunteer at this soup kitchen, will it end world hunger? Will people really stop dying of starvation if I do this?" and then conclude that it's pointless to volunteer at the soup kitchen because it's not going to solve world hunger. That sounds horrible, but it's the exact same logic you're applying.

And remember everyone likes to say "I'm only one person, I can't do anything." But one person adds up. Let's use California as an example. In the past few years, they've occasionally had problems with their power grids in summer because of people cranking up the A/C and overloading the stations. Now, let's say this problem could have been prevented by say, everyone turning their A/C down to "medium" instead of "high." Just for the sake of argument.

So one person says "Eh, if everyone else turns theirs down to medium, I'm not going to overload the power grid by having mine on high, so I won't turn mine down." The problem is, 10 million other people say the exact same thing. So no one turns down their A/C. And the grid gets overloaded. Because 10 million people are only "one person." You see what I'm getting at?

Sure, there's a chance that the people being hurt in the Congo won't immediately get better lives if we boycott these companies, or write the companies letters, or make TV ads and movies about where these materials come from. That's entirely possible. But isn't it worth trying? Is there really any harm in giving up what are pretty much luxury items such as a 3DS system or an iPod, in the chance that it might actually stop human suffering?

Not trying to guilt trip anyone here. I apologize if it sounds that way. And I've already stated, there are very good and logical reasons for not participating in the boycott. I just don't feel that "It won't change anything so it's pointless" is one of them, because you don't know it's pointless until you try it. And if 50 million people decide to stop saying "It's pointless for me to try" and actually DO it, maybe it will get done.

It's not easy feeling like you're alone in trying to change the world. I know I feel very, very alone many times when I do it. It's made me want to give up. But I know if I give up, then I really will never succeed. I have to keep trying. No matter how hard it is, I can't give up if I feel it's truly a worthy cause.

Remember, whether you tell yourself you can or you can't...you're right.

[TopazRaven]

Well, in the end, I guess I'm a selfish witch. Sorry. I'm not going to sell all the clothes, shoes and electronics I already own. I live with my mom, I don't have a job at the moment, I have NO money. I survive off of my mother's good will. I'll try my best not to willingly personally buy from the above companies, but I can't speak for the people who live with me. I've also already decided I'll get a Dell instead of the Apple laptop that I wanted, but for now that's all I can afford to do. I really just don't see how I can track down where everything I bought was made. Everything around here is made in China! It's highly rare for me to ever find a 'made in the USA' sticker on something.

[Yuki-Anne]

I'm still at a loss about the electronic dictionary problem. An ipod would have been the most elegant solution: I can download language software comparable to having an electronic dictionary, an ipod is the same price, and an ipod has a variety of useful functions, whereas an electronic dictionary is just that, and nothing more. Worse yet, the electronic dictionaries available are going to be Canon, Casio, or Sharp, which have worse track records than Apple. *sigh* I could go without. It's possible. An ipod is, as Nate said, a luxury item. People have been learning Japanese without them for years. But it would be so helpful, and it's the most financially responsible choice in this arena. :/

EDIT: I did find this article on Apple's response to the issue: http://gizmodo.com/5574785/steve-jobs-on-conflict-minerals-its-a-very-difficult-problem

DOUBLE EDIT: I actually found a bunch. Just google "apple conflict mineral" and there's a ton of info on it.

[Warrior4Christ]

Yeah, what Pascal said.

Effectively the only way companies will change is if they see that sales is dropping because their supply chain is questionably linked with suffering. And the only way that will happen is if consumers make a big fuss and let the company know that it's something they're concerned about and they value the people that are part of the supply chain. "So I'm not going to buy from you." This looks like it happened in the conflict diamonds case, so it's doable, but it needs to build up a lot of momentum. If for some reason the best choice of a product is from a questionable company, then feel free to send them a well-written letter expressing your disappointment that they haven't shown an interest in cleaning up their supply chain if you end up buying it.

Here's another site that rates manufacturers on the slavery-free-ness of their supply chains.
http://free2work.org/home

And here's a relevant song - Change the World by Seraphs Coal:
People tell me I'm insane
Trying to make a difference today
They think my attempt's in vain
"You could never save them all
So why bother trying at all"
Against this view I will remain.

But it's not gonna change the world
Giving money or giving time
No, it's not gonna change the world
And you know-
That it's not gonna change the world
Given power of any kind
No, it's not gonna change the world
Still I've got to try...

I'll be living day by day
Giving the love that He gave
It doesn't matter what you say
Of the sparrow He keeps track
So every starfish I'll throw back
One difference is still difference made
And that's okay...

But it's not gonna change the world
Giving money or giving time
No, it's not gonna change the world
And you know-
That it's not gonna change the world
Given power of any kind
No, it's not gonna change the world
Still I've got to try...
Got to try

(It's a hard song to find, but it's at the 5:00 mark here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUNNQZnNJ7s&feature=related)

[Mr. SmartyPants]

So what about the other major companies that were entirely unreported in the article you linked? Companies like Gateway, Cisco, Xerox, Kyocera, Nvidia, Epson, Nikon, ATI and ASUS?

Another question, would it be better to get a device from a yellow ranked company that lasts you for... 5-10 years, or get a device from a company with a slightly better record, but have to buy 3 or 4 in the same timespan?

You bring up a very good point. I really don't know, Mech. I guess the logical point would be to be against buying them too. But what I think that is important is that we as consumers are conscious of outcomes of our purchases. What is best is that we are trying and by doing so we are also spreading a message to all companies. Not just the ones in the report.

As for your second question... I dunno. I'll need to think about that.

[Shao Feng-Li]

Well, in the end, I guess I'm a selfish witch. Sorry. I'm not going to sell all the clothes, shoes and electronics I already own. I live with my mom, I don't have a job at the moment, I have NO money. I survive off of my mother's good will. I'll try my best not to willingly personally buy from the above companies, but I can't speak for the people who live with me. I've also already decided I'll get a Dell instead of the Apple laptop that I wanted, but for now that's all I can afford to do. I really just don't see how I can track down where everything I bought was made. Everything around here is made in China! It's highly rare for me to ever find a 'made in the USA' sticker on something.

You can't and you don't need to feel guilty over it. Also, don't let one forum post and few article links change your entire lifestyle in a few hours. For what it's worth, I'm not losing sleep over my iPod and clothes. No matter what we do, the Congo is going to be an evil place, whether they export to Japan or not. Even Apple is manufactured in China. Who can really ever know what goes on. And a lot of the same parts used in other computers are used in Apple. Whatever you do, just pray about it. I don't want you to merely guilt trip, but feel genuine conviction, you know?

[Cognitive Gear]

Well, in the end, I guess I'm a selfish witch. Sorry. I'm not going to sell all the clothes, shoes and electronics I already own. I live with my mom, I don't have a job at the moment, I have NO money. I survive off of my mother's good will. I'll try my best not to willingly personally buy from the above companies, but I can't speak for the people who live with me. I've also already decided I'll get a Dell instead of the Apple laptop that I wanted, but for now that's all I can afford to do. I really just don't see how I can track down where everything I bought was made. Everything around here is made in China! It's highly rare for me to ever find a 'made in the USA' sticker on something.

And this is where I realize that I have failed to communicate effectively.

This isn't about getting rid of everything in your life that is made unethically, right now, today. Clearly that isn't an option for people, and it's probably impossible.

What this should be about is awareness and taking responsibility for the things you can control. The Shop with a Conscience Guide is immensely helpful in finding companies that offer clothing that you need which are made without causing suffering. It should be noted that most of the things they offer are more expensive, so I don't think that you can or should try to jump in all at once. It just isn't practical.

What is practical is buying what you can from suffering free manufacturers. Otherwise, try to make what you have last longer than normal, and try to so some research before you buy. A safe rule of thumb is, if in doubt, buy it at the thrift store.

That's it. Just change the things you can control, and try to make things last longer.


A quick note in regards to the Apple vs Dell here: The Dell may use less materials gained from unethical sources, but the Apple may last you twice as long. The amount of time it will last you should also be a consideration.

[Midori]

Well, in the end, I guess I'm a selfish witch. Sorry. I'm not going to sell all the clothes, shoes and electronics I already own. I live with my mom, I don't have a job at the moment, I have NO money. I survive off of my mother's good will. I'll try my best not to willingly personally buy from the above companies, but I can't speak for the people who live with me. I've also already decided I'll get a Dell instead of the Apple laptop that I wanted, but for now that's all I can afford to do. I really just don't see how I can track down where everything I bought was made. Everything around here is made in China! It's highly rare for me to ever find a 'made in the USA' sticker on something.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. I'm probably not going to change my buying habits either (because they're pretty modest and I'm also not financially independent). If God impinges on my conscience I'll do something different. Heck, if God tells me, I'll go to Africa and raise an army against slave labor or something.

EDIT: Okay, this may be controversial, but consider this argument: suppose boycotting clothing made in sweatshops is bad. It's true that the working conditions are terrible and the workers ought to be paid more, but the workers probably have no other choices. If nobody bought their products, wouldn't they lose their (admittedly miserable) jobs and starve to death? I'm not entirely sure about this argument, but it seems sound to me. What do you think?

[TopazRaven]

Question, how would shopping at a thrift store help? They don't make their own clothes, it's donated or they buy used or unwanted merchandise from local shops or just random people. As far as I know in least. You still don't know where the clothes came from. It could even be from over-seas as far you know unless you know where the owner of the thrift store gets their inventory. Meanwhile, I usually shop at Wal-Mart, Target and JCPenny for clothes I'll admit. The site Warrior4Christ posted gave Wal-Mart a C- grade when it came to wither there materiel was made through slave labor or not, but I didn't see Target or JCPenny. I was rather upset that Sketchers got an F, that's my favorite brand of shoe and the only sneakers I ever where. I've been buying them my whole life. Meanwhile Hershey got a C- to. Why chocolate, why!?

Edit: Also, I REALLY stink when it comes to doing research. I can never find what I'm looking for. Does anyone know of a website that will actually list how and where all the major companines purchase their iventory?

[Peanut]

There is no evidence. Just silence. And the possibility is real and it is happening. And because there is no assurances, I believe that nobody should buy from these companies. Until they openly do something about it, I will uphold this position. The fact that it is happening means that there are suppliers that are still buying conflict minerals. The fact that there is a market means that it's somehow getting into consumers hands through some corporate mean.

I realize its been a page since this was posted but, this statement bothers me a lot. Honestly, I can't believe you said it Ryan. Because, how this is worded right now, is about the same type of logic that could be used to accuse an innocent man of a crime just because he doesn't say "I'm innocent." I understand these are companies and its easy to hate something like that, but I don't see why we should treat them any different in this case. You know, innocent until proven guilty. After all, these corporations are made up of people like you and I who are trying to support their families in a difficult economic time.

Even if we do sell all our game systems though, aren't we still supporting these companies? We are giving the game to someone else, who perhaps has no idea about the conflict themselves, and they will then use the systems and buy games for them. Thus still supporting the company as was stated before.

Well, not really. First, when you sell your system to say, Gamestop, the company who produced it doesn't get any money from that sale or from any sale that Gamestop makes off of it (if I'm remembering correctly). So, you wouldn't be supporting the company with your money in this case. Second, my real point in suggesting this was a way to actively fight back in a symbolic manner. Of course selling your system isn't going to actually cut support to the companies involved but that isn't the point. By selling it and giving the money to charity you are saying that you are sorry for being ignorant when you made this purchase and also do not hold material items to be more important then the lives of those being affected by Conflict Minerals. I mentioned the story of the Rich Young Ruler earlier and that's kind of what I'm suggesting here (in case you aren't familiar with it, you can read it here).

[Shao Feng-Li]

Heh, wouldn't selling a system just be passing the evil thing onto someone else? Really, selling it would just kinda be null. Unless you like held it above your head in Gamestop and shouted "I AM SELLING THIS SYSTEM TO HELP THE OPPRESSED PEOPLE WHO MADE IT."

So, I'll hang onto my Gameboy since no one would want it anyway.

[ShiroiHikari]

I see a problem.

If you're buying thrift store goods so you can remain "cruelty free", then aren't you really just relying on Those Poor Saps who don't know/don't care about INJUSTICE to fulfill your material needs? And in that case, aren't you really only helping your own conscience rather than ending human suffering?

I'm not saying buying from thrift stores is bad, and I'm not saying buying from department stores is bad either. But if you want every single piece of merchandise ever sold to be completely free of cruelty then you've got some pretty serious world-changing to do, the kind of world-changing that can't be done in a couple of years, or even a lifetime, or even a hundred lifetimes. As long as human beings are running this show, human beings will suffer and injustices will happen.

I am not advocating reckless irresponsibility, and I am not advocating cynicism. I'm just saying that I don't really think changing your consumer habits is the way to end human suffering.

[Yamamaya]

Just buy used games. Companies to this day are getting all butthurt about Gamestop's used game sales.

I do agree with ole MSP, but I think we shouldn't automatically assume Nintendo is getting their minerals via unethical means. Is it possible? Yes. Is it confirmed? We don't know. They might be buying it via companies that keep hidden the fact that they obtain their minerals through the unethical mineral trade in Africa.


This is more of an economic moral problem than anything else. In capitalism, the goal is to make a profit. The best way to do this is to buy from places that sell crap low and then sell that crap for a high price.