Should III World countries allow the use of 'child labor'? pros and cons?
As we know people suffer there, and sometimes it is only one way to survive. But according to international law it is illigal, and people are outraged, because it is unethical absolutely. On the other hand, it's ok for mentality of these countries when their kids go to work, and try feed family. Should international community interfere this situation?
|
1
point
Whilst I don't think it is "right" for 3rd world countries to allow child slavery, no way should there be international interference. As I've said before, it is difficult to implement first world, modernized ethics onto a third world, impoverished, traditionalist country. Besides, international interference would not benefit anyone. All that would happen would be countless dead bodies, and still child slavery would continue. It's already illegal, doesn't stop it happening. 1
point
No. And actually child labor is one of the many reasons 3rd world countries remain such. It's a vicious cycle where children spend their days working or just trying to survive instead of learning and advancing, meaning as adults they are not able to move beyond that mentality both from a psychological perspective and of course because they simply don't have the knowledge. So then of course they raise their children to do the same. This is allowed to happen not necessarily because a country is incredibly poor, though that is of course part of it. The larger part is corruption of the government or simply a lack of government or one which focuses more on buying arms than paving roads and digging wells. There are two ways to stop it: 1. Western countries could simply stop buying things made with child labor, but this would take some laws against western companies importing these and all kinds of beaurocracy and enforcement. The U.S. primarily, but a lot of western governments simply don't have the will to stop lord corporation from doing whatever it wants. 2. The actual countries could simply stop using child labor. This would mean a major loss of income and a shift from investments in 3rd world ruler's palaces and weapons to schools, wells, roads, etc. Ironically actually doing either would raise the living standard of all people, and after a couple generations seriously cut down on the world poverty rate, making these countries actually richer in the long run. But they continue to opt for short-term gains instead of a longer view, and 1st world countries continue to opt for cheap products over an improved world economy which makes everyone richer. It's kind of dumb. Actually, I agree with you, but they need education for the development, and investing for proving of this education. Governments are dumb. Therefore international influence must interfere including own goals through the social projects mb,and to improve their situation, at the same time. Only after that, with outside support these countries can achieve long-term goals. 1
point
|
