andrew_jorgensen | (no subject)

Yesterday's icon made me expand my wishlist. Making complex animations would go a lot easier if only I had my own East Asian sweatshop. After all, the producers of Futurama have their Korean animators, and they're able to get forty-five frames of a scene; by myself, I can manage only twenty-two. Yes, I definitely will be looking into this unfair labor practice idea. Maybe I could take on an unpaid iconing intern.

Speaking of unfair labor practices, my favorite quote in today's New York Times comes from this article on Wal-Mart's successful resistance to unionization:

Cody Fields, who earns $8.10 an hour after two years, said that he had originally backed the union "because we need a change" but that the videos had been effective. "It's just a bunch of brainwashing," Mr. Fields said, "but it kind of worked."

I guess it did.

Personally, I have no problems boycotting Wal-Mart; I find shopping there unpleasant and I am glad to avoid it. It's just that all the standard complaints about Wal-Mart can also be levelled against Target, which is often non-union, drives out local mom-and-pop stores, etc., and I love shopping at Target.

Also in today's Times is an article on some Alaskan bacteria that were revived after lying frozen in a pond for, possibly, 32,000 years. There's a techno-thriller plot in that; Michael Crichton might have to revise his stance on global warming.

And finally, the Times also contained an ad: "My kingdom for your old jewelry!" it proclaimed, above an etching of Henry VIII. "Henry VIII loved jewelry, and he didn't care about the cost. Windsor Jewelers is like him in this respect." Windsor Jewelers, Inc., apparently wants very much to associate itself with the British Crown and isn't too particular about those who wear it being distinct individuals.

Today I assembled a rolling tea cart from a cheap, drugstore-bought kit. The last line on the page of instructions was the boldfaced "CAUTION: Do Not Injured Yourself When Installing." That should hold up in court against any claims of liability. My East Asian sweatshop will have better proofreaders!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

But for some reason, it is extremely popular among pretentious undergrad and grad students to "take a stand" against Wal-Mart for those exact reasons, and then proclaim that "Target is great," therefore basically leaving the vague impression that Target must be different but never explicitly saying that it is. The result of this ends up being slightly akin to that of the Wal-Mart brainwashing videos, in that I've started to decide that Target is magically better somehow. Well, I'm sure they are better than Wal-Mart but that's just not that hard to do.

I think, I think, that a boycott of Wal-Mart can be justified on anti-censorship grounds, that Wal-Mart refuses to stock the lad mags and Parental Advisory stickered CDs that Target gladly sells, but that's about the only politically salient difference. Personally, I think people should just be happy to say "Target is cleaner and has nicer stuff." That, at least, is down to what my boycott of Wal-Mart comes.

There are a few things I've heard that make me feel like I can say that Wal-Mart is worse about labor in a "lesser of two evils" sort of way. I know they were having people work off the clock, and they are hoping to basically crush all the real (very unionized) supermarkets eventually with their Superstores. I think in the long run Target couldn't be as much of a force for evil even if they really tried.