GAP ATTACK
gap attack | 30.11.2003 14:05 | Globalisation | Social Struggles | London
29 Nov. 2003
As part of international day of action 'Buy Nothing Day' and due to the policies of
GAP and its owner's seven central London GAP clothing outlets will remain closed.
One for each shopping day of the week.
Their front doors have been glued shut.
These include the 3 in the Covent Garden area, Piccadilly Circus and the 208 Regent
St. store.
The stores are supposed to open for business at 10am.
As part of international day of action 'Buy Nothing Day' and due to the policies of
GAP and its owner's seven central London GAP clothing outlets will remain closed.
One for each shopping day of the week.
Their front doors have been glued shut.
These include the 3 in the Covent Garden area, Piccadilly Circus and the 208 Regent
St. store.
The stores are supposed to open for business at 10am.
gap attack
e-mail:
thegapattack@yahoo.com
Comments
Hide the following 21 comments
what right have you ....
30.11.2003 14:19
sceptic
it's not a case of forcing opinions on people
30.11.2003 17:29
it isn't a case of forcing opinions on people. It is a case of GAP being a company that manufactures it's goods in sweatshops. Do you think you would like to work in such circumstances? They don't have that choice. We have a choice whether or not to annoy GAP, and we choose to do so.
non-sceptic
well, actually, it is ...
30.11.2003 19:56
In your opinion, what GAP is doing is wrong. But that is your opinion.
They run 'sweatshops'. Presumably pay and conditions are better than local pay and conditions [otherwise people wouldn't work there] but less good than in say the UK. If they were to give UK pay and conditions, there would be no point in out sourcing them. They could close their 'sweatshops'and throw people out of work in another country. And you'd probably glue up more doors if they did so.
sceptic
Oh, yes, here we go - GAP etc are evil blah blah
30.11.2003 20:16
chipper
e-mail:
chip_perr@yahoo.com
And the same applies to your labour rights?
30.11.2003 22:25
If you are sacked, you have a right of appeal, you have a right to work in a place that is safe, your wife has a right to work without sexual harrasment, if she becomes pregnant, she can't be sacked 'for being less productive'.
Workers in sweatshops don't have any of these privileges, and we demand that the companies which use sweatshop labour, and then sell their products in our streets, improve conditions for their workers. If they don't we will use civil disobedience to campaign against these companies.
Mark
please read more carefully ...
30.11.2003 22:57
And why don't you campaign for better labour laws throughout the world rather than target one particular company? Your technique works only for companies that sell in the UK.
sceptic
Targetting GAP does help workers worldwide.
30.11.2003 23:31
We're not suggesting removing jobs from these countries, we're demanding that they treat their workers fairly. Some companies have responded to consumer pressure in recent years, but GAP is unfortunately still one of the biggest offenders.
Sweatshops operate throughout the world, in fact that is one of the ways that companies like GAP exploit their workers. They will play one government off against another, in order to reduce worker's rights.
Mark
did I suggest ...
01.12.2003 00:29
The trouble with 'direct action' is that it's double edged. If someone objected to the nasty circuit boards in Indymedia servers made in the Phillipines, would you be happy if someone glued the doors of Indymedia?
sceptic
Direct action
01.12.2003 08:42
If you don't like direct action maybe you should go and live somehwhere where it isn't part of the political process.
Mark
And another thing
01.12.2003 10:37
"Forcing opinions down other people's throats" indeed! Ever heard of advertising? Marketing? Laws? Religion? And the particularly insidious indoctrination that we have in the West where our unsustainable and inequitable way of life is "sold" to us as "the only way"?
We are sceptics- you, my friend, are a gullible stooge.
SickOfYou
Sceptic's a lefty
01.12.2003 15:49
And doubtless this post will elicit a stream of pompous and verbose invective from the plucky troll himself.
Exposed for what you are, however, mate.
All those who have come to recognise and love your turgid rantings will be particularly impressed with your call to improve labour laws globally both in the developed as well as the developing worlds. Could it be that you are finally coming round to our way of thinking, or is it possibly that you've stretched out your scrawny neck too far this time? I can just picture the scene had somebody made an original post advocating a global overhaul of labour laws in favour of workers. It would have instantly provoked a negative response from yourself, and further negative responses to anyone who tried to gainsay you.
Could I be so bold as to request that you post, once again, your opinion that labour laws should be overhauled globally to strengthen the rights of workers and to make production and profit more equitable? Block capitals please, I intend to frame.
Bendeus
By your request , sir
01.12.2003 17:06
I would be very happy to see other countries as prosperous as the UK.
Could our prosperity be anything to do with our economic system?
sceptic
Prosperity
04.12.2003 13:43
Or, could it be that the prosperity of prosperous countries is a mix of historical theft (colonialism), educated populations, battles for social justice and socialised services? People like to credit capitalism with how great our lives are in the West - if it was up to capitalism, we'd all be working 7 days a week, 14 hours a day for pennies. The quality of our lives is due to constant agitation from the left - the Haymarket Martyrs to the post-WWII Labour government in the UK.
Donnacha
Did anybody notice
04.12.2003 16:00
Current approach isn't having your desired effect, thankfully I don't see you having the imagination to do anything different. Roll on next year, don't imagine anyone will notice then either.
Free Trader
e-mail:
free_trader2002@yahoo.co.uk
Nike noticed
05.12.2003 02:05
Mark
Fair Price Day
14.12.2003 13:17
Fair Price Day where we offer to pay retailers like GAP a fair price for their products based on the cost of the sweatshop labour + transport from across the world + few pennies for their UK staff + nothing for marketing and advertising because we all know what they are about anyway = about a quarter of what they currently charge and being the good capitalists that they are how can they refuse.
Then even those heartless souls who think sweatshops are preferable to the alternatives of growing your own crops, going to college, learning a craft etc. would jump on board because idiots like that love a bargain and deep down hate the thought of being ripped off and taken for a mug.
John
e-mail:
soapbox_cabaret@hotmail.com
It’s all about the power of protest!
17.12.2003 15:10
The sad truth is people can’t depend on their respective governments to behave in a way that provides protection from the abuses of big business. The end result is an increase protest, boycott and direct action.
If the power of protest, boycott and direct action force governments and the corporations to change their ways, then great. After all it’s one of the only powerful tools that the average person has left.
Jim
e-mail:
scoob@disinformer.net
gap
03.01.2004 18:37
jane
undecided
10.01.2004 01:32
real effect is one that I am undecided on. On the one hand I am of course strongly against sweatshop labour, and I am quite aware that the workers sourcing materials for
places like GAP get a raw deal.
On the other hand, the points made by some of those opposing the direct action seem valid as well. If GAP stopped using sweatshop labour, would conditions for the workers be any better? I have personally always avoided buying goods made in China and opted to buy New Zealand where I can get it, or Australia or EEC where I can't. But am I really helping sweatshop workers by doing so? Would they not be better off working in sweatshops than
not working at all.
The issue seems to me far more complex, and is related to free trade, deals between governments and a host of other factors. In the long term, boycotts and direct action
may pay off, but what about the short term. Should we be sacrificing the short term welfare of Chinese workers for long term gain? Are there better ways of achieving fair working condtions for these people?
I am still undecided, and could be convinced either way by rational argument (though not by personal abuse directed either at me or others on the site).
Phil
the big problem is..
12.01.2004 16:46
It is the same with fuel; alternative sources of fuel and electricity are suppressed so we are dependent on the large corporations. When there was the fuel blockades it almost brought the country to a standstill.
Dependency=Control.
X
Another way of thinking
15.01.2004 10:49
This doesn't mean we should tie everyone up to level the playing field - lets give everyone shotguns instead.
I feel the biggest problem with the left today is that they want to protect people from harm, by adding more and more laws and restrictions to what people can do. Capitalism is free and fair, *assuming* you have the power to say "no" to any deal and not starve to death or die of disease the next day or otherwise be massively harmed. New laws do not work.
What _does_ work is showing people how to achieve power for themselves. Instead of trying to protect people with a "we know best" mentality, teach them how to make themselves more powerful. Help people to understand the power of unions, but also to understand how the legal process works, how to communicate their ideas in the media, how to gain skills and learn things to improve their lives.
In short: help people rise up and become more powerful, so they no longer need protecting from opression because they simply do not allow themselves to be oppressed.
Exactly the same answer works for all causes of opression: Instead of "affirmative action" programs as the answer to racism, help people use the media to show the oppression to others and make it clear the individuals and corporations who propogate it. Help them understand the legal system better so they can prosecute more racists, show people that if they learn new skills they can increase their worth to an employer, and thus their power over that employer. And if an employer won't hire them, help them create their own businessess, with their own ideas.
With the exception of some groups of disabled people, children and some groups of elderly people, almost everyone can be helped in this way - they can take control over their own lives and become so self-empowered that people simply cannot exploit them. They also lead much better lives as a result.
_entropy_