iSlavery
Exploitation of workers for the production of technology in pursuit of profit. As described in [[Goodbye iSlave]] by Jack Qiu.
âiSlaveryâ is âa planetary system of domination, exploitation, and alienationâŚepitomized by the material and immaterial structures of capital accumulationâ
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
Material being the physical devices, and immaterial being the things we do on them?
This in turn underscores the âworld system of gadgetsâ that Qiu refers to as âAppconnâ (13); a system that encompasses those who âdesignedâ the devices, those who âassembledâ them, as well as those who use them.
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
What is the story behind "assembled in China" that we might see on our devices?
As Qiu demonstrates in discomforting detail this is a story that involves exploitative labor practices, enforced overtime, abusive managers, insufficient living quarters, and wage theft, in a system that he argues is similar to slavery.
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
âTechnology does not guarantee progress. It is, instead, often abused to cause regressâ
Referencing slavery is contentious, but it sounds like Qiu lays out his reasoning for using the terms.
In considering which elements from the history of slavery are particularly relevant for the story of âiSlavery,â Qiu emphasizes: how the slave trade made use of advanced technologies of its time (guns, magnetic compasses, slave ships); how the slave trade was linked to creating and satisfying consumer desires (sugar); and how the narrative of resistance and revolt is a key aspect of the history of slavery. For Qiu, âiSlaveryâ is manifested in two forms: âmanufacturing iSlavesâ and âmanufactured iSlaves.â
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
The [[manufacturing iSlaves]] are those who working in conditions similar to slavery to produce high-tech goods.
In the process of creating high-tech gadgets there are many types of âmanufacturing iSlaves,â in conditions similar to slavery âin its classic formsâ including âCongolese mine workersâ and âIndonesian child labor
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
Qiu investigates many ways in which âinstitutions and practices similar to slaveryâ shape the lives of Foxconn workers.
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
"[[Manufactured iSlaves]]" are those addicted and constantly attached to their devices.
âmanufactured iSlaveâ entails âa conceptual leapâ (91) that moves away from the âpractices similar to slaveryâ that define the âmanufacturing iSlaveâ to instead signify âthose who are constantly attached to their gadgetsâ
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
many companies that have made their fortunes off the immaterial labor of legions of âmanufactured iSlavesâ dutifully clicking âlike,â uploading photos, and hitting âtweetâ all without any expectation that they will be paid for their labor. Indeed, in Qiuâs analysis, what keeps many âmanufactured iSlavesâ unaware of their shackles is that they donât see what they are doing on their devices as labor.
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
While smartphones may be cast as the symbol of the exploitation of Foxconn workers, Qiu also notes that these devices allow for acts of resistance by these same workers âwhose voices are increasingly heard onlineâ
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
[[Phone Story]].
âthe underbellies of the digital industries have been obscured and tucked away; too often, new media is assumed to represent modernity, and modernity assumed to represent freedomâ
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]] (from Goodbye iSlave)
Qiu highlights the coercion and misery that are lurking below the surface of every silly cat picture uploaded on Instagram, and he questions whether the person doing the picture taking and uploading is also being exploited.
â [[Shackles of Digital Freedom]]
There are lots of good arguments within the book, but the use of slavery as a frame is problematic, despite Qiu's nuanced approach to it.
The matter of âslaveryâ only gets thornier as Qiu shifts his attention from âmanufacturing iSlavesâ to âmanufactured iSlaves.â [âŚ] When Qiu discusses âmanufactured iSlavesâ he notes that it represents a âconceptual leap,â but by continuing to use the term âslaveâ this âconceptual leapâ unfortunately hampers his broader points about Foxconn workers. The danger is that a sort of false equivalency risks being created in which smartphone users shrug off their complicity in the exploitation of assembly workers by saying, âhey, Iâm exploited too.â
- public document at doc.anagora.org/islavery
- video call at meet.jit.si/islavery
(none)
(none)