Maquiladoras: Problems and Solutions

The slavery imposed upon the Mexican people by the last few U.S. administrations must be ended. The Clintons have had as much to do with the NAFTA horror (and related subsidies) as the Bush family — making conditions for Mexicans on both sides of the border — as abominable as anything experienced by “servants” of the South prior to our Civil War.

Just try to find out via googling what products from what companies are flooding our country… from Mexico. For your general information. Or because you want to boycott. It won’t be easy. Online one finds, primarily, information about maquiladoras which might help those interested in investing in sweatshops and the like. Virtually nothing an activist can put teeth into.Contact the author if you have difficulty finding particular information.

If you fancy that you would have been an abolitionist 150 years ago, I submit that you’ve got an agenda to embrace with regard to maquiladoras. Whether or not the war in Iraq ends tomorrow. Whether or not all of our troops are withdrawn from foreign shores. Whether or not the sweatshops of India are addressed by Congress, and the GAP and NIKE labeled for what they actually are among informed adults. No matter what the “weather” is in Politically Correct Circles.

A cry from The South goes out to you.

Veteran border rights activist Enrique Davalos told historians Mike Davis and Justin Akers Chacon recently:

Maquiladoras combine traditional ways of exploitation…with new, intensive ways of exploitation based on high-speed productivity. Working in a maquiladora means [living] in poverty with no hopes of getting better…. Average daily wages in Tijuana…are about six to seven dollars for ten working hours. This is enough to pay only 25 percent of the very basic expenses, without including rent and education. So maquiladora workers are condemned to live in shantytowns without piped water, power, sewage or trash collection. Temperatures in Tijuana fluctuate from 30 to 110 degrees Fahrenheit, but 66 percent of the houses don’t have piped water.

The maquiladoras are risky and unhealthy labor places. Most of the companies force the workers to deal with dangerous chemicals with no training and no appropriate protection. As a result, labor diseases and accidents are common…. Workers ruin their eyes, lungs, hands, backs and nervous systems after a few years…. In addition, workers without fingers and hands are not rare, but workers’ negligence is always used to explain recurrent ‘accidents.’ In fact, maquiladoras not only deteriorate workers’ lives, they also pollute their families and communities. Ejido Chilpancingo is a neighborhood located near to Otay, one of the most expensive industrial parks in Tijuana. Because of maquiladora pollution, residents of Ejido Chilpancingo are exposed to lead at levels three thousand times higher than U.S. Standards.From p. 118 of No One Is Illegal: Fighting Racism and State Violence on the U.S.-Mexico Border. It’s a Haymarket book out of Chicago by Justin Akers Chacon and Mike Davis.

So much for the “unique status” of lead toys from China.

The fact that with NAFTA Mexico has become almost entirely dependent on the U.S. for trade shouldn’t stop us from researching which companies benefit from this abominable form of slavery. No more than we should justify wearing diamonds because “at least we’re providing ‘some’ jobs for the Congolese, better than what they would have otherwise.” Or, well…you know the mantra.

Even the Chinese are now exploring ways in which they can exploit the NAFTA stranglehold on Mexicans for their purposes. For getting around U.S. trade restrictions, etc.

Over 1.3 million small farmers forced into bankruptcy during the decade 1994-2004, coupled with “mandatory migration northward” for 15 million more in agriculture in the near future, provide a clear picture of why the Zapatistas had their uprising.Alan M. Kraut’s Silent Travelers: Germs, Genes and the “Immigrant Menace” (New York: Basic Books, 1994), pp. 270-71 delineates the health-based reasons for migration northward. However, even once they arrive — as things stand — they’re still the victims of forty-five thousand different pesticides used in agriculture. They are ravaged by leukemia, lymph node cancer, multiple myeloma (bone cancer) in adults, and leukemia and brain cancer in children…and much more. And speaking of children, according to federal law, children as young as nine years old can work in the fields with or without their parents.

These are numbers and a force that cannot be stopped by a handful of Minuteman vigilantes or a U.S. version of the Berlin or Israeli Wall.

Bill Clinton launched a new standard for border militarization with his Operation Gatekeeper in 1994, and Bush pushed through a $32 billion Homeland Security bill for 2006 designed to provide enormous increases for border enforcement. Then there’s Arizona’s Operation Safeguard, Texas’ Operations Hold the Line and Rio Grande the bipartisan Kennedy-McCain bill, Bill Richardson’s co-opting, Hillary Clinton’s threats….

But none of that will work.

It won’t work because of the simple fact that Slavery doesn’t sit well with Nature.

The only question is whether or not YOU are going to do something about this. You don’t have to be a John Brown here, but all this certainly begs for a few more Thoreaus and Stowes.

Why not start with putting an end to some of your purchases?

Marcelle Cendrars, freelancing daughter of Blaise Cendrars, can be reached at: bcendra@yahoo.com. She is the "Provost" of San Jose, California's Free Underground College to Kindergarten Educational Retreat, a home school network of dissenting citizens who encourage parents to have their children drop out of mainstream institutions, and make use of alternative educational options. Read other articles by Marcelle, or visit Marcelle's website.

9 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Deadbeat said on November 14th, 2007 at 10:11am #

    The maquiladoras has been around since 1965 — beginning during LBJ’s administration. My recollection is that the reason why they developed was again for racist reason — to prevent Mexican from coming into the U.S. That would make sense as LBJ was a Texan. Today you see this same vile racism being spewed from another Texan — Lou Dobbs.

    Boycotts could have some effect but with such global commercial integration today it’s going to be extremely difficult. Clearly most U.S workers are against NAFTA. This was the key to the rise of Ross Perot during the 1990’s. However the betrayal by the Democrats (most importantly Bill Clinton and Al Gore) help to cement NATFA.

    The best way, I think, to see the demise of NAFTA will be a revolution in Mexico itself. Obrador came close in the election but I don’t think he has the capabilities to go far enough to overthrow the current government. The people who are being exploited in the maquiladoras perhaps should join or embraced the revolutionary movement of the Zapatistas.

    My point is that I don’t believe that U.S. workers are in a position to terminate NAFTA or do anything about the maquiladoras. The reason is because there is very little solidarity among U.S. workers. Racism plays a major role why U.S. workers are so divided so there is very little chance of relying on U.S. worker to act in a coordinated manner.

    The workers of Mexico, in my opinion, stand a much better chance of aligning with the struggles occurring in Venezuela, Nicaragua, Argentina, Cuba, and Bolivia. And embrace their history of struggle against the U.S. for inspiration.

  2. Marcelle Cendra said on November 14th, 2007 at 10:50am #

    There will be no “revolution” in Mexico for the same reason that you cite regarding boycotts, the size of our “global commercial integration.” And, in fact, I am not advocating the usual kind of boycotting. The “boycotting” was brought up to stimulate some kind of inquisitive behavior, to encourage the reader to do “something.” Yes, traditional forms of solidarity (among workers and others) won’t work these days. Another paradigm for action is demanded, and I encourage readers (especially those who live in California, but not just those) to contact me asap regarding that. Aligning against the U.S. has great value…and can be accomplished to some extent, but specific targets within the U.S. must be put on the table (to attack following new models of protest, action); that’s a mandatory, hands-on step that I hope readers will embrace with me. –MC at moc.oohaynull@ardnecb.

  3. Deadbeat said on November 14th, 2007 at 11:32am #

    There will be no “revolution” in Mexico for the same reason that you cite regarding boycotts, the size of our “global commercial integration.”

    Actually I disagree. I think there is a much better chance of revolution in Mexico than any kind working class solidarity in the U.S. I think the working class of Mexico and Latin America as a whole has much greater solidarity working class awareness than anything you see among workers in the U.S.

    The people of Mexico made a strong protest against the stolen election but they needed to go further. This would put the U.S. government in a extremely contradictory situation. They would either have to invade Mexico to quash such a revolution because they would have a “leftist” government on their boarder but such an invasion would bolter Mexican nationalism.

    Also any such action by the United States would be unpopular among Hispanics who are now the largest minority group. In fact if “Americans” want to to help this movement perhaps the first step is learning Spanish and forming alliances with Hispanics and struggling against these immigrant racist like Lou Dobbs.

    Yes, traditional forms of solidarity (among workers and others) won’t work these days.

    I don’t know what you mean by” traditional form of solidarity won’t work these days” What are these “traditional form” that and why won’t they work?

    I think the biggest challenge is that the working class are isolated and divided and that the first step is building alliance and understanding the interconnectedness of many of these issue. The working class is divided among race and class lines and only when those barrier can be bridged can there be solidarity.

    Liberals has done an excellent job of compartmentalizing issues and this is why socialism needs to be brought back into working class awareness.

  4. Marcelle Cendra said on November 14th, 2007 at 7:51pm #

    There’s absolutely no need to begin by delineating a comparative study between workers in Mexico and workers here…in any sector of society. That’s a no-brainer. I don’t know what you “disagree” with, as I never said anything to draw out such a comparative comment. They protested but needed to go further vis-a-vis the election? What does that have to do with my comment about the corporate power being to pervasive, etc. for “revolution” to get off the ground? Your second paragraph is made up of theoretical points that there’s no reason to argue with…in trying to discuss the likelihood of “revolution” in Mexico. Nothing of what you said precludes that Mexicans will not “go far enough” again and again in the realm we’re discussing. Regarding your Dobbs paragraph…yes, for the most part…BUT alliances are not being formed, have NOT been attempted much among any of major anti-war or other leftish groups in the U.S. for quite some time. Nothing signficiant, nothing ongoing. Only minimal, token efforts in name only. In your final three paragraphs, you first pose questions about my skepticism re solidarity…and then, in your next-to-last paragraph you provide your own answers…which I tend to agree with, though there are additional reasons…including the “reduction” in union life around here. –MC

  5. Deadbeat said on November 15th, 2007 at 11:31am #

    There’s absolutely no need to begin by delineating a comparative study between workers in Mexico and workers here…in any sector of society. That’s a no-brainer. I don’t know what you “disagree” with, as I never said anything to draw out such a comparative comment.

    Ok let’s backtrack…

    You’re article suggest that “we” can take a stance regarding the injustice of Mexican workers by “our” action such as …
    Why not start with putting an end to some of your purchases?

    Ok that sounds like you are suggesting boycotts. My initial response was to suggest that boycotting products as a form of action are weak, dubious, and futile because of global commercial integration.

    Your response to my argument was to clarify that you are not advocating “boycotts” …

    And, in fact, I am not advocating the usual kind of boycotting. The “boycotting” was brought up to stimulate some kind of inquisitive behavior, to encourage the reader to do “something.”

    Ok, I’ll accept that you are not advocating boycotts but you are advocating that somehow workers in the U.S. show some kind of solidarity with Mexican workers by encouraging readers to do “something”.

    Also you asserted the following…

    There will be no “revolution” in Mexico for the same reason that you cite regarding boycotts, the size of our “global commercial integration.”

    Ok so let me explain to you what I am disagreeing with. You are suggesting readers (workers) to display some form of solidarity with Mexican workers (by doing “something”) and you suggest that a “revolution” is Mexico is not possible because of global commercial integration. That is what I am responding to.

    To reiterate, my points are these…

    [1] The chances for U.S. worker solidarity (ala boycotts or by “doing something”) with Mexican workers is extremely low because U.S. workers are extremely divided and are especially divided by race and class issues. The immigration issue and the rise of Lou Dobbs “populism” as well as increase racial incidents and Zionism and the lack of working class ideology have contributed to the weakening of U.S workers. This is why what you are suggesting as a solutions in your article are extremely futile.

    What needs to be confronted head on is racism that connects these issue — white supremacy, immigration (racism towards Mexicans), and Zionism. It is too easy to divide U.S. workers along issues of race and class. (As a footnote notice I didn’t say gender because that an issue that need to be worked out among each subgroup as they build solidarity via their struggle against race and class issues).

    [2] This since you are requesting U.S. workers to “do something” and then state that “revolution” in Mexico is unlikely due to global capitalism it opens the door to make a comparative analysis among U.S. workers and workers in Mexico (and Latin America generally).

    Mexican workers were outraged by the stolen election and for several weeks openly expressed their outrage — especially the demonstrations that virtually shut down Mexico City. You can read articles written by John Ross on CounterPunch. He was very candid about Obrador inability to take that energy to the next level — takeover of the government. Recall that Chavez attempted a takeover in the 1990’s and spent time in prison for doing so. The Mexican people had the election stolen in the 1980’s and had to endure years of right wing governments. Apparently, Mexican workers will never achieve any progress via the electoral process. Therefore Mexican workers will only achieve any progress when they decide to take over the reigns of power.

    My point is that global commercial integration will not advert this movement in Mexico. Also in Latin America, workers are much more conscience about worker solidarity. Latin America workers are not as afflicted by the same division that afflict U.S. workers. Thus the need for the comparison exposes the weakness of your call for U.S. workers to “do something” compared to what is occurring and has occurred in Mexico.

    Latin America has much greater revolutionary potential than anything that will emerge (or won’t emerge) in the U.S.

  6. Marcelle Cendra said on November 15th, 2007 at 4:34pm #

    First of all, ending purchases –which is just a suggestion in the context of my article, not a crucial recommendation– is NOT the point. Rather, the main point is to encourage readers here to become more aware of who is doing what to the Mexicans and others. My piece has virtually nothing to do with recommending solidarity –in action– with Mexicans as a first step. First step, again, is becoming conscious of who the major culprits are and what products they may be taking for granted; that’s the reason for bringing up the topic of (possible) boycotts. Such would be a nat’l consequence of outrage…if readers knew more…without suggesting coordination among U.S. citizens or between citizens here and there. I am not recommending action in solidarity (which you are talking about in traditional terms); that’s a proven failure. That’s not to say it’s not wonderful and powerful what is happening in Latin America among the masses of people. It is to say, however, that I am not under any delusion regarding the potential for hooking up workers here and workers there. Even restricting one’s focus to the workers in Latin America, one must note that they have their own fragmentation and divisive issues…which make them a supreme underdog vis-a-vis attempts at solidarity among themselves. There’s a lot in common on that count, with what’s happening today in Latin America and what happened in the Mexican Revolution. During and after the Revolution. 100 years later we have maquiladoras. That’s not to discourage trying, but to underscore that in both realms solidarity is on shaky ground…in terms of the results one can hope for cross the board. One cannot tackle racism and the other areas you bring up without “awareness” first being addressed. My article has its hands full delineating the need for (and how to go about acquiring) awareness without jumping the gun to those other important (complicated) issues. You’ve mistakenly attributed an agenda to my piece which was never intended. It’s neither about the relative potential re Mexican vs. U.S. workers, nor about the need for workers here to join hands with workers there. And the role you give “solidarity” in my article does not exist. I don’t know why you recommended the Ross article and the others. I’ve never experienced doubts about Electoral History in Mexico. I’m not recommending workers do something together. Rather, I’m urging readers to do something individually beyond going over all the stuff they already know and agree with. Who exactly is benefiting from the maquiladoras? That’s an opening question that I invite readers to embrace. To take a step beyond theoretical argument and preaching to the choir, as it were. Thanks. –MC

  7. Deadbeat said on November 15th, 2007 at 8:20pm #

    Rather, the main point is to encourage readers here to become more aware of who is doing what to the Mexicans and others.

    OK, the title of your piece is Maquiladoras: Problems and Solutions. I took that literally to mean that your article provides a description of the problem and offers a solution.

    Ok, in your response you are now saying the purpose of your article is awareness building. Fine with me.

    You go on to say the following…
    Even restricting one’s focus to the workers in Latin America, one must note that they have their own fragmentation and divisive issues…which make them a supreme underdog vis-a-vis attempts at solidarity among themselves.

    While it is true that all groups have fragmentation issues that they must overcome, noticing the rate of progress and movement to the left in Latin America means the workers of Latin America are finding ways to solidify. Contrasting even the dynamics in Mexico (John Ross who is an excellent source) to that of the U.S. will, in the “spirit” of your article — inquisitive behavior — help readers think about and ask an important question such as “could that happen here in the U.S.?”

    The answer of which IMO is NO because racism has been extremely effective fragmenting workers and there is no sign that U.S. workers are willing to overcome racism.

    You also state the following…

    I am not recommending action in solidarity (which you are talking about in traditional terms); that’s a proven failure.

    I disagree with that statement. Solidarity is not a “proven failure” — in traditional or modern terms — whatever that means. The failure is due to the lack of solidarity. Solidarity is crucial. Solidarity is not just marching hand-in-hand. Solidarity is awareness as well as empathy and moral support. Your article, whether you admit to it or not, is an article that makes people aware and builds empathy for people facing the injustices that you are writing about. What you are doing is building solidarity. Unfortunately language today has been so corrupted that even you are confused as to the definition of solidarity.

    This is why again I bring up the issue of racism because it is the main reason why there is little solidarity among the U.S. working class and why the U.S. working class is so fragmented.

    Finally you say…
    I’m not recommending workers do something together. Rather, I’m urging readers to do something individually beyond going over all the stuff they already know and agree with. Who exactly is benefiting from the maquiladoras? That’s an opening question that I invite readers to embrace

    If I read you correctly you want the reader of your article to THINK. But if you want people then why truncate and fragment the connectedness of racism to the lack of solidarity. Those connections would fill in the gaps that your article leave wide open.

    For example, the real irony of your article is that you don’t mention the role of racism played in the origins of the maquiladoras. It is why I mentioned it in the first sentence of my initial response. The maquiladoras were created in 1965 in order to retard Mexican immigration to the U.S. — for utterly racist reasons. It wasn’t until the 1980’s that the maquiladoras were used primarily against U.S. manufacturing workers. Racism opened the door to the subsequent attack against all workers — U.S and Mexican.

  8. Marcelle Cendra said on November 15th, 2007 at 9:16pm #

    “Awareness building,” considering the state of ignorance among citizens who say they are concerned, IS a solution of sorts. The usual thoughts about what’s a solution usually get people mired down in tactics that haven’t worked in the past. Learning that a product one uses in one’s house is coming from an abomination might very well kick a given person’s brain into high gear, and contribute to creative solutions. First things first, however. I agree with you totally that learning about what’s happening elsewhere might trigger something positive domestically. However, I don’t understand the point you’re making in that sentence that has IMO in it. Of course I’m trying to contribute to solidarity. My point, however, is that “traditional forms” have failed time and time again. Marching in circles with placards held high is just one of many examples. I can give tons upon request, and, then, from process of elimination perhaps readers can be encouraged to get more creative in this realm. Only an idiot would take the stance that solidarity is not good. I do NOT do that. Again, it’s a no-brainer that racism detracts from solidarity. As far as your ending words about racism go, again, it’s VERY CLEAR TO EVERYONE READING THIS, I BELIEVE, that racism provides many of the underpinnings of the various manifestations of capitalistic abominations, including the maquiladoras. THAT’S why I didn’t bring the subject into the discussion. Once people can get a handle on where something is amiss, what they’re handling daily that can be traced to a given horror…THEN we can bring in (the obvious factor of) racism. –MC P.S. I invited readers to contact me –which is an attempt at building solidarity– but…no takers. That should tell you something very important in the context of my complaints about “traditional forms” of solidarity, btw.

  9. Yahov said on November 16th, 2008 at 4:23pm #

    I am here to point out that the maquiladoras are providing work for people who can not get a job and some of the owners of these ‘Sweatshops’ as you may call them, provide the necessities (houses and clothes) for them. Some of these workers are content where they are because if they did not have this they would not be anywhere!