Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Exploitation and Sweatshops - Coggle Diagram
Exploitation and Sweatshops
The Rule of Rescue
: If you come face-to-face with someone in danger, and you can rescue them at little cost, then you have a moral duty to do so.
Rights Violation Theory of Exploitation (RVToE)
: A exploits B if and only if A benefits from (i) violating B’s moral rights, or from (ii) threatening to violate B’s moral rights.
Hillel Steiner’s Theory of Exploitation
: A exploits B if and only if A benefits from (i) violating B’s moral rights, or from (ii) threatening to violate B’s moral rights, or from (iii) someone else having previously violated B’s rights.
Problem: In 1940 the German airforce destroyed Rotterdam, this created employment opportunities for builders. Steiner’s theory entails that these builders exploited Rotterdammers. But that’s absurd. So Steiner’s theory is false.
Lifeboat Auction case: RVToE says that the captain is not exploiting anyone. But she is, most would say.
Applied to sweatshops if socialist: Everyone in society shares the moral right to use the T-shirt factory. Morally speaking, we are all the collective owners of the T-shirt factory. But the legal owner of the factory stops the rest of us from using the factory. This allows the legal owner to exclusively benefit from its products (the T- shirts). So the legal owner is violating everyone’s moral rights.
RVToE entails that the legal owner of the factory is exploiting her workers (and to some extent everyone else in society).
Libertarian view of worker’s rights (Powell and Zwollinski). (1) The legal owner of the factory has the exclusive moral right to use the T-shirt factory. So she is not violating anyone’s moral rights by claiming the products (the T-shirts) as her exclusive property.
Unequal Exchange Theory of Exploitation (UEToE)
: A exploits B if and only if A gives B something of less value than B gives A.
Objection: Christmas Presents Case. At Christmas my partner gave me a present of greater value than the present that I gave her. UEToE says this is exploitation.
What kind of value?
Labour value of a commodity
: how many hours a unit of that commodity took to make.
Objection: Hero does 49 hours of sweaty, exhausting, unpleasant, and dangerous work for Henry. Henry does 50 hours of rewarding, exciting, and pleasant hours of work for Hero. Henry is exploited?
Utility value of a commodity for a consumer
: amount to which using / consumer an extra unit of the commodity satisfies her preferences.
Personal value of a commodity
: how much using / consuming an extra unit of the commodity contributes to their personal good
Exchange value of a commodity
: price if it were sold in a competitive market.
The Forced Unequal Exchange Theory of Exploitation (FUEToE)
: A exploits B if and only if B is forced (no reasonable/acceptable alternative) to give A a thing of less value than B gives A.
Objection: forcing people to pay income tax to cover other people’s disability benefits is a forced unequal exchange. So FUEToE / UEToE says that the disabled are exploiting the able-bodied.
Objection: Universal Basic Income, some think Alain is exploiting his workers, but they are not forced to work.
Powell and Zwollinski argue that typically sweatshop owners pay the workers the market price for their labour. So sweatshop owners pay workers the exchange value for their labour. So the exchange is not an unequal exchange (assuming value = exchange value), so not exploiting.
It is much better for a worker to work in a sweatshop and have food clothing and shelter, than to not work but to starve and be homeless. It is slightly better for a rich sweatshop owner to employ another worker and make more profit than to employ one less worker and make less profit. So the exchange actually favours the worker.
Unfair Division Theory
Problem: Fair Exploitation Case (B is secretly taking home most of the profits (in order to buy medicine for his sick mother)).
Unfair Division Theory of Exploitation (UDToE) - Resources Version
: A exploits B if and only if A and B work together to produce some resources and A then takes an unfair share of these resources
Unfair Division Theory of Exploitation (UDToE) - Social Surplus Version
: A exploits B if and only if A and B interact with each other and this interaction results in A taking an unfair share of the social surplus (the increase in the total amount of personal good that results from the
interaction) of their interaction.
Problem: Rope Case: UDToE entails that B is exploiting A. But that’s false: A is clearly exploiting B.
Domination Theory of Exploitation
: A exploits B if and only if B is vulnerable to A (A has power over B if and only if A can harm B at little cost to themselves), and A benefits from this vulnerability by dominating A.
Problem: hotdog seller A benefits from B’s vulnerability. So DToE says that the hotdog seller exploits the hotdog buyer, even if the price is very low