I am not buying Hershey Chocolate #nohersheyhalloween

[spacefem]

Something I've learned along the way of trying to be a good citizen is that you can't just randomly boycott companies when you hear that they're evil, because you may very well end up supporting an equally evil company.  When I hear someone griping about wal-mart's sweatshop-made clothes, and they're standing there in kmart's sweatshop-made clothes, it doesn't really make a statement. 

But this Hershey's chocolate crap is, well, crap.

It's been TEN YEARS since the US Department of Labor pointed out five West African nations for using forced child labor to harvest cocoa.  Most chocolate companies responded... some slowly, but it happened.

So I thought the child labor accusations were dated, stemming from a 2000 BBC documentary that hits the blogosphere at regular intervals.  This week I found out ten years haven't changed as much as I hoped.  In 2010, a Tulane University reported that two million migrant workers in Cote d’Ivoire and Ghana were actually trafficked children!  Abused, moved from neighboring countries without their natural parents, and forced to perform hazardous work spraying pesticides and wielding machetes.

[quote=change.org]Virtually all of the major chocolate companies like Nestle, Mars and Cadbury, as well as cocoa importers like Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland, have agreed to ensure that at least part of their cocoa is produced under certain labor, social and environmental standards and certified by a third party. Hershey, however, stands out as the only company that has no policy in place to trace its cocoa and ensure and independently verify that certain standards are met.[/quote]
-  http://news.change.org/stories/time-for ... fair-cocoa
 
When Nestle is beating you at corporate responsibility, you know there's a problem people!
Hershey will only care where its cocoa comes from if we do.  So I'm joining the call.  I am not buying Hershey bars for trick-or-treaters this Halloween.  I might spring for certified fair trade, I might just buy M&Ms.  I'm definitely gonna write about it.

More info: http://www.raisethebarhershey.org/

[lillerina]

There's also the fact that Hershey use indentured servitude in their packing factories in the US. I read about it on Tiger Beatdown.

[Storage and Disposal]

It's a good thing Hershey chocolate sucks. I never really ate it much when I didn't know how evil it was, definitely not starting now.

[trombonekatie]

Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention.

I just spent the better part of the last hour reading about it, and you know what's really insane? People are still DEFENDING the Hershey Corp--claiming that the other exploitative industries, supported by child labor in that region is probably worse--so it's ok. I can't wrap my head around someone being able to convince themselves of that.


http://www.naturalnews.com/033940_child ... sheys.html (the comments on this article is what spurned me to go off topic there...)

Meh, anyway, again--thank you. I will definitely be conciously boycotting hershey's and letting other people know about this.

[spacefem]

Natural News is a website plagued with idiots. At least here the article was good, even if the comments were painful ("how hard can it be to harvest cocoa? Kids are lucky to have jobs...")

Usually even the articles are bad, all about how you should just do whatever is natural and feels right, whether it's healing your kids cavities with nutrition or laughing at people who get measles vaccines. It's painful to me.

[Hufflepuff]

Sorry for being completely off-topic, but just because someone's wearing Kmart or Wal Mart-made clothes doesn't necessarily mean they're supporting them. They may have taken the clothes from a lost-and-found (which would be stealing, yes, but not supporting sweatshop labor). The clothes may have been a present, and refusing to wear them because they came from a sweatshop wouldn't do anybody any good -- the company already got its money, and you'd only be able to return it for store credit, so the damage is done. And you don't know that they didn't tell the person who got them the present, "Please don't buy me anything from there in the future because they use sweatshop labor."

Or, they may have bought the clothes from a second-hand store, or off a private citizen via eBay or Craigslist or some such (in all cases which the same as it being a present would apply; the store already has the money, you're not creating demand and thus not supporting the chain by buying second-hand). And outright theft is always a possibility, not to mention dumpster-diving. There's a dozen and a half ways to obtain anything, really. Can't assume someone wearing Kmart-brand clothing is supporting their business practices.

[monk]

That^ doesn't work. All the clothes, chocolates, diamonds etc that are made with slave/forced/whatever labor have always already done the labor months if not years before the product is on the shelf. There's no way to ever go back in time and undue the damage done, but by refusing to buy the product today and spreading the word about it you are sending the message that you find the companies past behavior unnacceptable and want it to change it's current behavior if it hasn't changed it's means of operating.

The best thing to do besides the economic boycott is to also send a letter to said company stating why you are boycotting their products. One letter and one person boycotting will do little, but like Spacefems doing here, spreading that message DOES have impact albeit an unknown amount.

[Rainbow Dolphins]

Okay, but the point of a boycott is to not give the boycotted company any of your money, right? You're saying, I will not contribute to your company in any way until you change your practices. And if you buy the product secondhand, you aren't giving them any money. And actually, you're supporting their competitor, which hurts them doubly.

[spacefem]

Yeah I kinda gotta side with huff here, buying secondhand is not the same as buying something new. The company gets nothing when you buy a sweater at goodwill.

Now, this is even more offtopic, but I did once have a big debate with a friend about buying a new car vs. a used car. It was sort of in the "eco-friendly" context, she said that buying a new car isn't ecologically friendly because of all the materials and energy needed to make it. I said that cars are cars, if I pass over a two-year-old model it's not going to end up in a landfill, someone IS going to buy it. Now, my family growing up had this thing where we always bought American cars... didn't matter if it was new, used, whatever. We just didn't want to be seen in Japanese cars. We've changed a bit, since there are plenty of American "made" cars that are nothing but piles of foreign parts, you can't win, but it was a big deal, and there the new/used didn't matter. We could really drift off here, so I apologize in advance for that if it happens!

[Mathmo]

Also on the new vs used car thing, I think there's an additional dimension in that new cars *are* more efficient / eco-friendly than old cars (although a 'made a year ago, bought second-hand' car would count as new here). When I was growing up, I always assumed that second-hand cars that were at least a few years old were they way to go - it was what my parents did and it seemed to make sense - but recently MrM has been looking at cars (his job might change next year in a way that means he needs to drive a lot) and it seems a lot less of a no-brainer. Esp as buying new there are some rather good finance deals (in the UK, ymmv especially in other countries) and more warranty-type protection, plus being cheaper to run generally.

[monk]

get a smart car.they're cheap, economical and safer than they look.

[Hufflepuff]

@monk: What Rainbow and spacefem said. On a related note, this is also why I never refuse a meal offered to me, even if it includes products from factory farms, which I don't support; the money is already in the company's hands, the damage is done, and me refusing hospitality isn't going to change that. Me, on a completely separate occasion (thus not ruining the enjoyment of the meal for others) bringing up the whole factory farming issue with said hospital-iers (tee hee), however, is.

Is there such a recognized thing as "dumpster-diving vegetarianism?" Not buying any animal products, but not not eating meat (dumpster diving, not refusing meals at relatives/etc. houses and so forth)? I don't think there is. Google turns up nothing. I should write a manifesto...

[rowan]

Well I wouldn't call it that because that sounds mega-gross....

[cwbyrvr]

Is there such a recognized thing as "dumpster-diving vegetarianism?" Not buying any animal products, but not not eating meat (dumpster diving, not refusing meals at relatives/etc. houses and so forth)? I don't think there is. Google turns up nothing. I should write a manifesto...

I'm trying to see if I can find a link on this, unfortunately I don't remember which religion this was. But I remember learning in a religions of the world class about a religion which practices vegetarianism, but they are allowed to eat animal products if they are to be thrown away. If I find a link on this I'll edit/post again if there's been a response.

Edit: Not what I was looking for, but this Wikipedia article is related - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism

[deanimal]

I have heard many people use the term "freegan," meaning a vegan who eats animal products if they are unaviodable gifts, destined for trash, already purchased, etc.

[Hufflepuff]

Well I wouldn't call it that because that sounds mega-gross....

You made me giggle for a solid minute.

@peeps: Ahh, freeganism. Sounds...like something sexual, but there you have it. Thanks.

Not that I'll be adopting that term, because I don't believe it inherently immoral to kill a creature to consume its flesh, I'm just specifically opposed to factory farms, but still. Nice to learn a new word.

[Tookie]

Well I wouldn't call it that because that sounds mega-gross....

No way. The week that my roommate dumpstered bacon was the week of the best breakfasts ever.