Boycott is not stupid

The calls for a boycott of Western goods is targeted primarily at those companies that are actively investing and thereby supporting the Zionist regime in Israel, the Israeli war machine and the colonising programme that is taking place in the occupied territories. There has never been a call to boycott American goods just because they are American, nor have there been calls to reject everything that is Western in toto. Indeed it would be pointless to do so living as we do in an integrated world economy where all national economies are inter-dependent with one another.

Nonetheless, for those still worried about the calls for boycotts and the implications thereof, let us remind ourselves of some simple realities:

Firstly, these foreign companies have never come to Malaysia or any other developing country for the sake of charity or to be nice to Malaysian citizens and workers. Its not as if one morning one of the CEOs of these multinationals woke up and thought to himself: “I have to invest in Malaysia to give work to the poor folk of Malaysia whom I’ve never met”. Malaysia was simply a convenient destination for them to park their capital thanks to the availability of labour, the tight control of workers (through repressive laws and anti-union legislation) and a pro-capital infrastructure that we had created for them. But let us not be naïve enough to think that any of this was charity on the part of the multinationals, who were quick to relocate as soon as there were other sources of cheap (and controlled, domesticated) labour abroad – first to Vietnam and now to China.

Fourthly, let us not forget the exploitative nature of the foreign investment we have seen thus far. I am stunned when I read and hear liberals say things like “what about the poor people working at fast food restaurants? And who will take care of them?” Well for a start I don’t think that working as cheap labour frying burgers or cleaning toilets counts as much of a career path in the first place. And we need to ask ourselves how and why we have allowed ourselves to slip into this precarious situation where we have become so dependent of companies that seek cheap, unskilled labour, to make up for the responsibilities of the state in the first place. In other societies – such as some of the states in India that have resisted the entry of multinationals – local governments and societies have been forced to remain resilient and imaginative in finding and creating job opportunities for their citizens rather than allowing them to be bought as cheap
workers on a temporary basis.

Gaza and the Liberal Conscience- The Lessons for Malaysia(Part V)
By Farish A. Noor

With the crisis in Gaza spiralling out of control and there being more talk about the need for boycotts of American goods, a wellspring of collective anxiety has broken out among Malaysians from all walks of life and as expected, a flood of liberal froth has flooded the internet as well.

Understandably a large section of the Malaysian public is perturbed by all this talk of boycotts and are now panicking at the prospect of having their lifestyles compromised. What might happen, they wonder, if fast-food outlets selling junk food (and its not called junk food for nothing you know) are shut down? Worse still, what will happen to Malaysian workers if American companies start pulling out? And what will happen if the threat of boycotts come true?
Well, before we all hit the panic buttons let us remember some simple facts:

The calls for a boycott of Western goods is targeted primarily at those companies that are actively investing and thereby supporting the Zionist regime in Israel, the Israeli war machine and the colonising programme that is taking place in the occupied territories. There has never been a call to boycott American goods just because they are American, nor have there been calls to reject everything that is Western in toto. Indeed it would be pointless to do so living as we do in an integrated world economy where all national economies are inter-dependent with one another.

This is reminiscent of the boycott of companies (and banks, notably) that actively invested in South Africa during the days of apartheid and again the aim was not to hurt Western economies or workers, but to make the simple point that we will not collaborate – directly or indirectly – with any government, corporation or bank that actively supported a racist regime.

But the heart-strings of the Malaysian liberals are tugged by the plaintive appeals of the managers of these companies when they remind us that Malaysians are also employed by these firms, and that there are bound to be job losses, etc. Furthermore we are told that such a boycott may occasion capital flight (which is bound to happen with the global recession in any case) and that Malaysia may have to go it alone henceforth. Right. Good.

These anxieties stem from the psycho-social conditioning that Malaysians have been put through after decades of uneven and ill-advised development since the 1980s. For too long Malaysia’s developmental model has been based on one model, namely that of the consumerist market-driven model of the USA. We naively believed that we could ‘leap-frog’ our way to developed country status by simply copying the developmental path of developed nations, while remaining blissfully ignorant of the power differentials that divide us. For too long we mistakenly assumed that by simply buying foreign technology would could develop, without at the same time building our own base of local scientists, researchers, academics and entrepreneurs. This has been the same mistake made by countless other developing nations, and now we see the results:

Our urban landscape has been altered to the point where anyone above the age of 40 would no longer recognise Malaysia today as every street, every neighbourhood, every avenue of our urban settlements are dotted with fast-food joints and shopping malls that sell us every brand of consumer product; most of which we do not really need.

In terms of our social values and standards of living, we have come to expect things that simply cannot be sustained in the long run, either economically or environmentally: Huge condos crammed with people, a city whose streets are crammed with cars, families with more than two automobiles, a luxury-driven lifestyle which basically forces us to become double-income families where domestic duties are then passed onto foreign maids and servants, etc. We demand these luxuries with the apparent ignorance of the fact that we have been passing the buck all the time, expecting luxury goods at cheap prices which means that our clothes and the other accoutrements we have grown accustomed to are made through cheap labour in neighbouring countries instead.

Urban liberals in particular seem to have adapted themselves to this ‘Sex in the City’ lifestyle which has expanded their comfort zone while forgetting the fact that Malaysia is still a country where the rights of workers is rarely protected, where the abuse and exploitation of labour is rife, and where rapid development has been guaranteed through an underground market of illegal foreign labour instead.

In short, we have allowed ourselves to become integrated as part of a profoundly unjust, immoral, exploitative capitalist economic system.

Having done so, however, we now come to realise that our sudden elevation to ‘semi-developed’ status has been nothing more than cosmetic and artificial. Malaysia on its own cannot alter the trading and investment practices of global multinationals that continue to support extremist regimes like the one installed in Israel. Our sense of paralysis and impotence compounds our moral dilemma and we do not know what to do; hence the calls for boycotts as a tool of last resort.

In the end, however, boycotts notwithstanding, we will probably see the slow retreat of foreign capital from Malaysia thanks to the recession more than anything else. If and when this happens, the psycho-social shock to a fragile and dependent society like Malaysia’s will be considerable. The rise of unemployment will occasion a further scramble for limited resources, and in the Malaysian context may well prompt right-wing sectarian ethno-nationalist movements to claim a bigger share of the ever-shrinking pie. How this crisis will be managed will depend on the abilities of the government, and will reflect on whether this country has achieved some degree of social maturity and cohesion (which I frankly do not think has been attained just yet.)

Nonetheless, for those still worried about the calls for boycotts and the implications thereof, let us remind ourselves of some simple realities:

Firstly, these foreign companies have never come to Malaysia or any other developing country for the sake of charity or to be nice to Malaysian citizens and workers. Its not as if one morning one of the CEOs of these multinationals woke up and thought to himself: “I have to invest in Malaysia to give work to the poor folk of Malaysia whom I’ve never met”. Malaysia was simply a convenient destination for them to park their capital thanks to the availability of labour, the tight control of workers (through repressive laws and anti-union legislation) and a pro-capital infrastructure that we had created for them. But let us not be naïve enough to think that any of this was charity on the part of the multinationals, who were quick to relocate as soon as there were other sources of cheap (and controlled, domesticated) labour abroad – first to Vietnam and now to China.

Secondly, let us remember that whatever gains that Malaysian society has made from foreign investment has also been accompanied by losses as well. The social, economic and structural costs for Malaysia have been high too. Our urban-rural demography has been radically altered in too fast a space of time simply because we depopulated our countryside to serve the need of foreign companies in search of cheap labour. The net result is that our agricultural sector has been severely under-developed and under-nourished, leading us to the pitiful situation where we have become a net importer of basic foodstuffs. In our rush to get foreign companies to invest here, we can no longer feed ourselves!

Thirdly, our continued dependency on technology and research from abroad has demonstrated two things: that many of our more developed trading partners had short-changed us and were never intent on sharing any technological know-how in the first place; and that we cannot develop by simply hiring foreign experts or buying off-the-rack technology from the global market. Once again, in the mad rush for developed country status we forgot that research and development, like all academic endeavours, is a slow, generational process that will take time. But a longer-term investment would have perhaps landed us with local talent instead, rather than boasting of any superficial developments or technological breakthroughs that were achieved by foreign experts and consultants working on a mercenary contractual basis.

Fourthly, let us not forget the exploitative nature of the foreign investment we have seen thus far. I am stunned when I read and hear liberals say things like “what about the poor people working at fast food restaurants? And who will take care of them?” Well for a start I don’t think that working as cheap labour frying burgers or cleaning toilets counts as much of a career path in the first place. And we need to ask ourselves how and why we have allowed ourselves to slip into this precarious situation where we have become so dependent of companies that seek cheap, unskilled labour, to make up for the responsibilities of the state in the first place. In other societies – such as some of the states in India that have resisted the entry of multinationals – local governments and societies have been forced to remain resilient and imaginative in finding and creating job opportunities for their citizens rather than allowing them to be bought as cheap
workers on a temporary basis.

The net result of our skewered development over the past three decades has led to the state of economic, cultural and mental dependency we see around us today. But the fact is this: Our rapid development that was unsustainable in the first place was bound to incur a cost on us sooner or later. And today, while facing this crisis in Gaza and not being able to act decisively, we can see how such economic dependency has led to psycho-social and political bondage as well.

Nobody ever said that reclaiming our rights as consumers and our dignity as a people with a culture and history was going to be easy; but the whinging of liberals who are ever-so-scared of losing their burgers and lattes does send a bitter taste down my throat. The figure of deaths in Gaza has passed the seven hundred mark, with more than three thousand wounded and injured. And yet all we can talk about is whether a boycott would work, while the liberals froth at the mouth and stare at their feet. This, then, is the end-result of an uneven developmental model that we should have been more circumspect about from the beginning.

End of part V.