The extra cost to oil, and one of the reasons it's going up.

We should all remember that when we fill up our gas tanks or use gas-powered energy in our homes, we aren't just paying for gas, we are paying for the murder of innocent people and destruction of the environment. Whenever possible, carpool, take public transportation, use rechargeable batteries, buy a hybrid car, and use alternative forms of energy with appliances and in the home to save resources and to lessen your support for these horrors.

This story, about a man named Ken Saro-Wiwa, is just one of many in a long list of complaints of oil companies. Saro-Wiwa was a famous novelist and nonviolent environmental activist in Nigeria. After speaking out strongly against the Shell oil company, which makes up about 80% of the country's economy, Ken was executed along with other nonviolent activists by the military government, probably with the support of Shell.

I heard Saro-Wiwa's son speak at the Northeast Regional Amnesty International Annual Conference a few years back. He also mentioned that, after his father's murder, Shell put up a page about social responsibility on their website, where they mentioned about 50 writers that have helped shape Nigeria. Despite Saro-Wiwa's success, fame, and awards, he was suspiciously left off the list.

You can read a bit more about this issue at: www.thepriceofoil.com.

You can also read another article about Shell's environmental crimes in Nigeria, which have an impact on the people who reside near the spills and plants.

Finally, you can read a perspective from a long time consumer advocate, that is, a person who is looking out for the general public's best interests when for-profit companies seek to ignore or override them. This is the work that Ralph Nader did for a long time that made him so famous and respected. In any case, this article provides some evidence that at oil companies have been wanting to shrink their supply of gas in the US for awhile so as to increase profits, while at the same time publicly blaming environmental activists for pressuring them into reducing their gas supply. There is probably more on the net about these issues to see how legitimate the article is, but it's definitely worth reading. Check it out here.

To me, it is highly believable that the oil companies have tried to spin responsibility onto activists. The same thing happened in the apparel industry. Activists would try to pressure companies into reforming their labor practices and pay a living wage (e.g. stop raping little girls in the workplace, forcing workers to have abortions, not letting girls go to school and work, makign workers work three 24-hour shifts in a week, and paying them so little their families couldn't afford food and basic necessities, etc. etc. etc.). Once the exploitative production factories were exposed, the retail companies, such as Nike or the Limited Company, wouldn't fix their problems and allow people to have a decent job. Instead, they'd often "cut and run," meaning they'd cut their losses, stop doing business with the subcontracted company, and move somewhere else so benefit from a newly exploitable labor force. Then they would publicly blame activists for making them have to shut down.

From everything I have read on sweatshops, let me tell you this honestly. Companies can afford to pay enough to their workers and still remain competitive in the global economy. They wouldn't even have to pass the entire cost onto the consumer, it could most likely be split. Sure, they would lose profit margins, and perhaps wouldn't be the number 1, 2, or 3 company in the world, but they would still make a ton of money on markup. One of the biggest drains on company expenses is corporate executives' salaries and the huge amounts of money spent on advertising throughout the false "seasons" they've created to make everyone feel like they always have to have the newest and trendiest clothes. If the execs would take paycuts, and the companies would pay more to the workers (still less than it would cost to employ people in the US, even with benefits), things could be changed for the lives of many. However, we all know this won't happen under market forces alone; hence, this is another example where government, and in this case, strong international regulations, must be put in place to keep for-profit companies from abusing people in their quest for greater profit margins.

For now, US residents will continue to face the pleasure of slightly cheaper products, but at the cost of atrocities so sickening that all pleasure should be taken away for anyone who knows about them and remains conscious of them. Please search online for fair trade and otherwise socially and environmentally friendly products. There are plenty of links on this blog and can be turned up fairly easily with internet searches as well. If a shirt costs you an extra 5 dollars, avoid drinking Coke and eating chocolate (two more products that are extremely exploitative) for a few days, and you'll have the money in no time.

Thanks to Anagha for passing some of the links along.

Comments welcome.