Originally Posted by
Just Bill
It would be reasonable to point out that there are easily two groups of requirements. One easily falls under the blanket of environmental stewardship. I think that is pretty straightforward.
The other group depends upon your labeling choice: Radical. Leftist. Communist. Socialist. Or jump to Nazi. Suppose there are a few other inflammatory labels one could apply too. Not being an expert at distilling anything down, let alone complex positions, into labels I'll leave that up to others.
Although the motivation behind such policy moves may be helpful. One could make human rights, basic decency, value of labor or simple moral arguments from a 'bleeding heart' standpoint. One could even throw the dramatic 'slave labor' and 'marginalization of non-white workers' around. Toss in some colonialism and native population oppression and you might win buzzword bingo.
And hard to disagree that those motivations are not real or might not apply or be used as justification in some form.
I think the more accurate term if you prefer one is economic engineering. The sewn goods industry is a mess. It is one of the largest industries on the planet where various unfavorable advantages affect the global economy. It's the unpleasant corner of the globe where horrible stuff happens. Socially, sure. But it's the social items that allow an unfair economic advantage to many companies. Currency manipulation, patent infringement, to flat out theft of intellectual property are all crimes committed and fueled by the simple fact that most of our sewn goods are produced in some dark corner someplace for tenths of pennies on the penny.
The reason the fabric mills, sweat shops, and other not so secret portions of the sewn goods industry were moved overseas is that Americans simply would not tolerate them. Pesky regulations and basic worker rights and safeties cost money. So we farm our dirty and expensive things out to places where such 'hindrances' do not exist. Our finished goods are imported back and the price we'd like to pay and we collectively look the other way. As we say in the trades, 'Can't see it from my house'. If the **** isn't in our backyard we can pretend our **** doesn't stink.
Retailers like REI are just as much, if not more so, economic victims of this continued black market of sewn goods. Years back when wally world, gap, and other retailers were supposedly working on this it was discovered that there were 'ethical' front companies who then turned around and hired subcontractors out the back door to continue to fill orders with the same folks they were trying to get rid of while pocketing the 'extra money' paid to them to do it right. Sewn goods can literally cost $1 or less. Hammock vendors in the US are facing problems with a flood of crap on Amazon. REI tries to build decent products and even economical 'house brand' items but are constantly undercut by these suppliers. A decent company like Osprey who tries to manufacture things right must compete against a pack retailer like VF corp with no such handcuffs on their profit making. REI puts them on the shelf, where as if you go to a traditional sporting goods store Osprey packs are pushed off the shelf by VF corp via exclusivity agreements.
You can buy widgets from a catalog of ali-baba sewn goods sources. Because you are buying finished goods from 'source, cut and sew' suppliers there are no regulations, no supply chain, nothing. I can buy a hammock for a few dollars, a sil-nylon tarp for less than $10. Tents for little more. Who knows what environmental costs were incurred, nor how many human rights atrocities were committed. It is a deep and very ugly issue on many fronts.
But the bottom line is always the bottom line. REI will not remain in business, nor will other suppliers of quality goods while the sewn goods industry remains in it's current form. Amazon sells anything, from anyone who can give them their cut. So do others. Common sense tells you that if you can buy a finished sewn good product for less than the cost of the raw material there is something seriously wrong.
Many of the 'fair trade' and other perceived social engineering you see is in large part financially motivated. It should be.
Only so many people can work at the Amazon distribution center, and even fewer if and when that center moves overseas. Unions have a proud tradition in this country, fair trade is simply a global variation on that theme. At the end of the day, if all one needs to do is cross an arbitrary line on a map to undercut your pay... all one can do is erase those lines via trade agreements and retailer demand. The only way to clean out these very dark corners of our global economy is for those who buy from this marketplace to stop doing so. That costs money.
All the feel good parts may have some genuine altruism behind them, but they help customers get on board and open their wallet to support the cost of these choices.
You can eradicate evil. The aforementioned actual Nazi's were eradicated when the good among us joined forces to remove that evil... at great cost.
Here's a simple question; How are you punished? What exactly has been taken?
If you choose not to shop at REI, have I been punished, has something been taken from me?
Should I counter protest your protest, demand you shop at REI? Contact my elected official?
If REI chooses not to shop at Vista outdoor, how does that hurt YOU?
One of Patagonia's original signature moves was organic cotton. A simple choice in the supply chain that greatly changed their business and the industry as a whole. The only one's 'punished' for this choice were industrial farms who profit from destroying our planet. A host of individual farmers were rewarded with continued contracts to farm with methods that let them sleep at night. Money was made, other companies paid attention, and one small part of the world became a better place.
We are a global community, even if we are not yet a global government. More and more your economic choices are your strongest and deepest political impact. More and more consumers vote for responsible products and deeply reward those companies that provide them. Who in turn reward us all with better wages, cleaner environments, and even political action.
Car companies do take steps to ensure their cars are safe, including new technology that literally does stop people from hitting other people. Consumers demand it, companies like Volvo and other brands market it.
Gun companies tried to implement 'safe guns' with chip or fingerprint readers. It is unclear who exactly killed that product, but it is clear that the free market and consumer rights were not high on the list of reasons.
Gun companies do take some measures to ensure safer products, it's good business. They don't want this PR nightmare, no company does. Rather than learning the lessons of companies like Patagonia, they march on with their heads buried in the same second amendment sand as ever.
Patagonia says, ' Don't buy this jacket' and doubles their customer base.
Gun companies say, 'Buy our product before they take it' and lose customers.
Patagonia says, ' This is our problem, so all sales on black Friday will go to the environment'... and they do record business that day and give away 10 million dollars but gain 100 million or more in sales from those customers in return.
Gun companies say this is not our problem, these are not our customers, we did not do this, no sympathy from us. Even simply donating a fraction of profits to a victims fund would be high on the list of recommendations from 'the most idiotic PR firm' you could possibly hire.
Patagonia takes a leadership roll; starts 1% for the planet, evaluates their supply chain, creates industry standards and drives all their competitors to do the same, vastly multiplying their impact on a global level.
I couldn't calculate the multiplier to figure out how much bigger the gun industry, or even an individual gun company is than Patagonia.
Certainly Patagonia has nowhere near the size of the NRA's reach and history.
So go beyond the bare minimum... what could be done. What lesson could be learned?
Is mental health the issue? Are gun companies donating 1% for the healthy mind.
Is it prescription drugs? Are gun companies dealing with this issue or teaming up with pharmacy companies to lobby politicians.
If a gun free zone poster is a false gesture? Are gun companies offering to train, equip and staff schools to prevent guns from entering.
If gun industry sales do fund so many outdoor activities, where are the companies when the national monuments, public lands and the environment threatened by the politicians they paid to elect?
Did Savage Arms declare the president stole your land? Or did they falsely declare the president (doesn't matter which one) is coming for your guns?
What meaningful action of any kind has any gun company done? On any issue beyond the second amendment.
What benefit have they provided to you? What punishment have they spared you from with their profits? What they take away your money, what do they do with it?
Tiny little Patagonia does more for you, with less, on so many levels. You don't even have to shop there.
His buddy Doug Thompkins protected more land than most countries on the planet.
Two piece of **** climbing dirtbags.
Where is one guy in the gun industry doing the same? I do not say that in a ranting or angry tone. Guns have a PR problem. They have a social problem. They are 'not good neighbors'.
Not eveyone is Yvon Chionard 'model citizen'. But the gun guys are starting to turn into the rich eccentric crazy dude on the edge of town nobody wants around. The inaction is starting to punish those around town.
A good gun owner can ask, 'Why am I being punished'.... but so can a good parent who did nothing but get their kid to school on time.
It's pretty simple... people have vote$, corporations are now people too who have even more money to stuff in the ballot box.
People are voting for companies that do the right things for the community as a whole.
Patagonia has messed up some stuff... but the litany of good things they do buys them enough goodwill in the neighborhood that they can move on.
It's also been profitable enough for them that others are saying, ' I wanna do what they are doing'.
The gun industry may not have messed up anything really... but they have no goodwill to help them with public perception.
I understand my fellow gun owners, sportsman and hunters contribute lots of money directly and benefit the community.
Do gun supporters not understand that the gun companies are not doing the same?
That beyond that the inaction and unwillingness to participate is potentially much worse?
If the response is simply that the gun industry contributes to the NRA, what exactly is the NRA doing to improve the community around them?
Is REI responsible because they teach the ten essentials, basic map reading, and other outreach to it's members at a discount? Nope.
I'm little more impressed by touting the NRA providing sport specific education to it's membership at a discount is some laudable item to note.
Why would anyone join a 'club' and pay money to it if it didn't provide benefits to it's membership.
So again... beyond basic benefit to it's members, what does it do for non-members. What does it do for the community, what does it do for the planet.
Why should anyone 'vote' for them?
A smart gun retailer and good businessman might want to ask a simple question; Why?
Why are consumers not passionately advocating and supporting that business?
I hear gun folks say we must protect our second amendment, but in support of the NRA.
I hear environmental supporters say we must protect what we love... by supporting these companies.
If I was Savage Arms/Vista Outdoor... I'd wonder why I had ceded my branding power to the NRA. Why customers are not looking to support my product.
Why nobody blames a car company for an accident, but they blame my brand for one. Why do people love Tesla even though a feature on that car literally did kill someone?
Beyond the basic... I like this tool over that tool and ford vs chevy type rivalry... why do people look at gun companies as a tool manufacturer and not as a BRAND they are proud to support.
The answer is simple...
The gun industry says, the world is messed up and you need to protect yourself. Don't blame me, don't hold me accountable, don't tread on me, don't take my rights.
Folks like Patagonia, REI, Tesla say; the world is messed up. WE need to protect ourselves. I'm going to take responsibility for this. I'm going to hold myself accountable. Don't tread on anyone, and give everyone rights so they don't feel the need to come take mine because they have less.
So yar... I am perfectly willing to hold companies responsible for fixing the evil in the world.
They are people, we all live here and have to be good citizens of this planet.
