Boycott FIFA. Call on the Architects and Engineers to end their working relationships on the projects. This is outrageous. We know better. It can start with Ms. Hadid. Speer the Younger and Arup.
Holy crap. If I'm not reading this wrong, the German architect in question is the son of a Nazi architect, a member of Hitler's inner circle. This guy made his career in such bastions of human rights as the Middle East and China. Who'd have thunk it? Not looking good for Germany really, is it? Architects depending on slave labour... runs in the family. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Speer,_Jr%2E (His father was the Nazis' principle exploiter of forced labor. http://www.auschwitz.dk/Speer.htm)
Holding sons accountable for crimes of their fathers is immoral. Let his actions stand on their own. No one's father should matter.
Pointing out that someone takes jobs in a certain area of the world seems morally questionable at best. He had to take jobs somewhere.
I feel awkward for posting this, because at first glance it looks like I'm defending something terrible. But the reason I'm saying this is because this is otherwise how witchhunts start, so this is the right thing to do.
If this guy is using the modern equivalent of slave labor, then he should be punished for it. That's really all there is to say.
I believe that each person is ethically responsible for their actions, direct or indirect. This man and his father are both guilty. "I needed the money" is no excuse before a court of law, even if you are a capitalist. And I don't believe for a second he needed the money.
>Architects depending on slave labour... runs in the family.
instead of "depending" (which sounds in this context with some active/intentional meaning) i'd say "doesn't care". Such attitude may naturally be passed up from father to son. And role of that attitude in the history of evil, and particular Nazi Germany history is well known.
Here's the logic: if your father was a war criminal, and you have a conscience, you'd probably work really hard to distance yourself from that atrocity. Not doing so is a pretty good indicator of a lack of empathy.
Heh. Your logic is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man ... I never said that. On the contrary, I believe that each person is ethically responsible for their actions, direct or indirect. This man and his father are both guilty.
Not caring to look myself, did this man's father raise him?
My father certainly influenced my outlook on many aspects of life when he raised me. I am of course responsible for my own actions, and it is everyone's responsibility to rise above the shortcomings of their parents, but to ignore the role a parent plays in their child's development is just silly.
For example, my father is an evangelical christian. I am not. Realizing that my father is gives a window, however murky, into my development and provides context for many of my beliefs and convictions.
Noting the similarities between the father and the son gives us potential insight into the [lack of] moral development of the son.
Not too much, except for the first eleven years, Albert Speer Jr. was born in 1934. In 1945 his father got sentenced to 20 years in prison and served until 1966, mostly in Spandau. Wikipedia states that he wrote many letters to his children from prison but "found himself unable to re-establish his relationship with his children, even with his son Albert".
>you strongly implied that his father being a Nazi somehow influenced his own behavior
A lot of psychological traits of a person form in early childhood. Do you think his childhood environment was very conductive to development of an unconditional empathy and other humanistic feelings toward other human beings, especially ones of non-"Aryan race"?
And you were born on the same planet as Hitler, as such you are responsible for the death of millions of Jews. After all, you failed to stop Hitler and as such you inderectly caused it. By your own admission people should be judged on their indirect actions as well, so you should probably go turn yourself in for your hate crimes.
He wasn't just an architect, he was Hitler's favoured architect and then promoted to run the entire wartime economy due to his ruthless efficiency. As such, he was the main guy in charge of the extensive Nazi use of slave labour.
Err, the whole article is about slave labour? And his father is well documented as the greatest user of such in WWII? Thus, the like father like son discovery was a total surprise... hence my post sharing that revelation? How is this not obvious? Are you just trolling? Is it possible to write another post with this many question marks?
It's a bit much to claim they're entirely independent people.
Obviously they are not.
However, Jr. seems to have spent his entire life trying to distance himself from the sins of his father, which is as good a thing as he could try to do.
Well this is what happens when you have no worker safety regulations and the families of the workers are poor Pakistanis and Bengalis that can't file wrongful death lawsuits. America's support of countries like Qatar will be remembered in history like our support of the Apartheid regime in South Africa. These countries treat Pakistanis and Bengalis as de facto slaves.
Furthermore, they take the workers' passports once the workers get there so they cannot go home. IIRC they are also required to get a permission to leave the country if they want to do so. I really don't understand why FIFA or someone does not intervene.
EDIT: Huh, seems like there is some investigation going on
"Government agents simply told West Coast employers that the Chinese workers that they employed, they now owned. What had been cheap labor now became slave labor."
It's an alternate history of the USA where the South won.
Qatar is one of a few countries which have an exit visa. These workers (en masse) could not leave the country, even if they want. So, yeah, they are slaves.
I read something a couple of years ago about the phenomenon of expats fleeing Dubai after the economic downturn because of the Emirates' harsh treatment of debtors (no bankruptcy, pay up or be jailed). Supposedly, it was common for people to just abandon their cars at the airport and high tail it out of town, never to return. I just found a delightful article highlighting the phenomenon of swanky luxury cars being abandoned at the airport or on the streets. I suspect that this is the main justification for the imposition of an exit visa. But of course the upshot is probably that British financiers end up fleeing their debts anyway, while poor Bangladeshis suffer indentured servitude.
You're a bit muddled up here. Tinpots dictatorships of various flavours have required exit visas for years, sometimes even for their own citizens, but Dubai/the UAE does not and has not.
Exit visas? Wow I never knew such a thing could exist. If you are a citizen of a country you should always be allowed to travel to that country unless you're arrested for committing a crime elsewhere.
It is a way to check you before you leave. Like a security guard checking your bag before you leave a store. Do you owe money, have legal trouble, etc. I am not saying it is right but that is how it is viewed.
Otherwise, (local politics, human rights aside) one shouldn't cross a frontier without considering the risk of being denied permission to come out again. Whims, national and personal, abound. Check in with your consulate -- remotely, if possible -- if that'll make you feel better.
And I'm not even pararnoid. Been there, done that. (The international travel, and jobs/labor (on and off the books) when it could be scary, that is.)
Crapshoot always. The odds change. Do the math.
Not to belittle desperate migration in search of a better life.
This [1] is the way Nick Cohen put it six months ago:
"The official justification for oppression is, as so often, religious. Migrants and employers are bound by the kafala system – taken from Islamic law on the adoption of children. "Kafala" derives from "to feed". Nourishment is the last thing the system provides, however. It delivers captive labour instead. Migrant workers cannot change jobs without their sponsoring employers' consent. As Human Rights Watch says, if workers walk out, the employers – the adoptive parents – can say they have absconded and the authorities will arrest them.
In order to leave Qatar, migrants must obtain an exit visa from their sponsor. This stipulation means that they can be held hostage if they threaten to sue over a breach of contract."
Where does the world stand, in general, on this issue? What countries are doing something about it? Most Americans probably can't find Qatar on the map. Finally, shouldn't the United Nations be leading the way on this? Anytime that the US plays "world cop", even if it's "good cop", we still take criticism.
Do the diplomas from these satellite campuses differentiate themselves from the 'real' universities? In my experience, one of the selling points of satellite campuses is that you get the same diploma from them, such that if you don't tell anybody that you didn't go to the 'real' school, nobody would know.
Not only is the United States not going to invade Qatar, it's going to be loath to make even a peep about human rights abuses. Qatar is host to one of the US's key middle eastern military bases, home of the United States Central Command: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Udeid_Air_Base
You changed your message about the economy, to which I had an answer. It's petroleum based not tourism. Unless the world agrees to embargo their oil, we can't stop them.
As for your neocon remark, I don't see any reason why we're going to invade another Middle Eastern country in the near future. The US is probably going back to supporting the current "stable" government.
This and news that a Qatari firm paid off one of the top FIFA officials for votes during bidding for the World Cup doesn't help Qatar's image going forward. [1]
Just to put this in perspective, Qatar won the bid in Dec of 2010 -- they are _literally_ killing 1 worker a day building this.
I spent some time in Dubai and Abu Dhabi and saw this "big money, big building" craze first hand... it truly is modern day slave labor. No more thought is put into the migrant workers than you would an extra shovel, concrete or tile - they are a resource to expend during construction. The locals don't see them as human, just building material.
I refuse to have anything more to do with professional sports. That includes the "professional level" university sports. (And -- I am reminded of their recent, latest round -- the Olympics.)
I'm just one person, but for my part I won't reward nor contribute towards such behavior.
The next step, I hope, is in my country to strip such institutions of their tax breaks and tax exempt status. And the perpetually extorted... "public construction funds" for new stadiums and such nonsense.
I've quite enjoyed playing sports, and I don't begrudge the role of the spectator. But current circumstances have become extremely distorting; this extends to the IP lobbying that continues to hamstring technical developments around media and connectivity.
I haven't attended a game in several years -- although most of my infrequent attendance had been at others' invitation, anyway.
Although I was never a sports nut, I no longer watch games on TV, at all. Recently, I told one friend I would not be attending his Superbowl party, this year. I had the prior year, with some misgivings, because I wanted to see people.
I did not watch the recent winter Olympics, and I told friends why. I shared some links to articles describing the outrageous branding practices, among other things. This seems to have gotten at least some friends thinking about the matter.
For the fellow who throws the Superbowl party, I specifically shared some recent reporting both on the ever more apparent link to traumatic brain injury (including that "Frontline" show and connected reporting) and on the enormous tax shelter that pro-sports teams have become for their owners. Also the financial shenanigans around facility financing. He has been reconsidering his attachment to the game and to other pro sports (including non-US football, aka soccer).
One friend is an auditor for the Federal government. He has taken the point that while this is not his specific purview, a lot of public money is, one way and another, going to line the pockets of specific, well-connected interests. Being an honest soul, he admits to significant discomfort with this.
I think that most people are basically "fair" and decent people. As they learn more, they find an increasing distolerance towards stomaching the situation. And they decide that there are other things they can spend their time, energy, and money on.
Again, I'm not dumping on sports. I'm communicating my strong dissatisfaction with what this "sports industry" has become.
Before we look at 2022, just look at 2014's World Cup.
It is known that the Brazilian government is still behind their schedule delivering stadiums and basic infrastructure.
Personally, I am proud to say the new NYC Mayor has made an excellent decision not bidding Winter Olympics (http://theweek.com/article/index/256746/hosting-the-olympics...). Multi-years of preparations before and after selection is going to take away energy focusing on real domestic-city-wide issues.
The Beijing 2008 Olympics was a great success given the amount of new stadiums and infrastructure added. Though the main stadium (Bird Net) was officially, completely finished sometime around March 2008. London's main stadium was completed in 2011 and under budget. Clearly if the government really care about the event, they will everything to stop corruption and prevent delays. I don't know anything about Brazil's local politic, but press has been criticizing Brazil government its poor coordination and corruption.
Every olympics or world cup is preceded by stories about how construction is far behind. And in the end, with some exceptions, most olympics and world cups work out fine.
These labor abuse stories are another issue altogether and a much more serious one.
One day everyone else will start to notice this cycle as well. Look at the reporting for the recent Sochi games, where the first week was rife with stories about unready facilities and hotels.
Then, once it starts, everything is forgotten and the sports become the center piece.
It's hard to figure out how bad this is because they don't give enough information about the other projects they compare to.
For instance, they compare to 25 construction worker deaths when preparing Sochi for the 2014 Winter Olympics. As far as I have been able to find with some Googling, Sochi officially involved 74000 construction workers, but an advocacy group for migrant workers says that there were around another 50000 working without permits. Let's take the high figure, and that gives us 1 death per 5000 workers.
So given 1.2 million migrant workers in Qatar, then if they were as safe as Sochi workers, we'd expect 240 deaths, so 900 does indeed look like it indicates they have some major safety problems.
The comparison to 11 who died during the Golden Gate Bridge construction seems pretty worthless. The FAQ at goldengatebridge.org says it was built by 10 prime contractors and the subcontractors, but also that they don't have any employment records from any of them so can't say how many workers were involved. It's also not a good project for comparison because it actually only had two fatal accidents. The first killed one man. The second killed 10 men, when a scaffold failed and the safety net did not catch them.
Up until that point, the project had set a record for remarkable safety. The norm for that kind of project was about one death per million dollars of construction, so getting that far with only one death was amazing, and even with all 11, I think they came in quite low. It was a $30 million project, so 30 deaths would have been normal. At that death rate, taking into account inflation, a project the size of the Qatar FIFA project would have, if safety was comparable to typical bridge projects at the time the Golden Gate was built, about 5000 deaths total for the project--which is close to what the article says they are looking at. However, bridge work is, I think, inherently more dangerous than much of the FIFA infrastructure work, and I'd hope bridge work today is more safe than bridge work was when the Golden Gate was built, so this is consistent with the Sochi comparison. Qatar does indeed to be doing something very wrong.
Conclusion: something very bad is indeed happening in Qatar.
There was a single death during the construction for the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver, and 10 deaths during construction for the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
(As you speculate for Sochi, there may also be reporting issues for the Beijing Olympics, but that is nothing but speculation on my part. I don't believe that the same could be said of the construction projects in UK or Canada.)
There is something _really_ wrong going on in Qatar.
For me, every work day starts by strapping on a pair of steel-toed boots and a hard hat, climbing high up some steel structure (usually hundreds of feet), building an anchor, and rappelling in to get done whatever needs gettin' done. I think this gives me a different perspective on matters of industrial safety than the typical Hacker News poster.
Granted, I have never worked in a developing country; neither have I worked in the United States in the 1930's.
The culture of industrial safety in the United Sates is... interesting, to say the least. The squeeze for productivity is there for sure, and it sometimes flies in the face of every employer's claim that "safety is our number one priority."
This puts the worker square in the middle of the predicament. Pressure, culture, and, sometimes, a lack of training and equipment creates the worker who is less-than-dilligent about their own safety. Then, when something does go wrong, whether it's a real accident, a "near miss," or just a "violation" that could have escalated but did not, the worker is blamed. Disciplinary action and firings are commonly heard about. This happens because the employer gets to point to "safety first," loads of policy, and their entire (huge) HSE department, while ignoring the fact that the worker was under pressure, mired in a culture of others behaving exactly the same, and, sometimes, poorly trained.
I'm talking about the United States in 2014, where we benefit from a history of labor unions, modern government regulations, two centuries of industrial experience, incredible technology, and a legal environment that scares the pants off every employer.
I cannot imagine what these migrant workers in developing countries are going through. Given the safety statistics we've seen here, can you imagine what the day-to-day grind is like?
"The world is a place rich in natural beauty and cultural diversity, but also one where many are still deprived of their basic rights. FIFA now has an even greater responsibility to reach out and touch the world, using football as a symbol of hope and integration." -- FIFA Mission Statement (http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/mission.html)
Slavery in this region is nothing new and this choice is abominable on FIFA's part. This type of treatment is endemic in the region including the UAE. In an organization that supposedly promotes equality, Qatar and other such nations should not even be allowed to participate or be members of FIFA. I suppose money talks loudest, however, mission statement be damned. Not to mention the "mistake" acknowledged by FIFA's president already of scheduling the world cup in a country whose average temperatures in June is 81 - 106 degrees Fahrenheit. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/news/20130909/2022-q...)
There are several similar stories of people not being able to leave the country, or life threatening situations like this in Dubai. It's a very similar case there as well with expatriate workers.
Qatar is actually a pretty rich country. They treat their migrant workers as barely a notch above slaves and do all kinds of scummy things and bait/switch them. Anyway, lots of money going to Qatar is not necessarily going to do anything but further enrich the ruling class there, and I highly doubt it will do anything for the migrant workers.
A system designed to exploit desperate people is just that. Systems are put in place in many countries that prevent this exploitation because it is terrible. Because people are desperate enough to be exploited doesn't mean they deserve it.
>But if you take such a job, you know the dangers. So you can take the job or don't.
Watch the documentary I posted below, in most cases they are not aware of such dangers. They are promised high returns and better living conditions than their original home by various agents.
>Why don't we try to advance 3th world countries instead of raging over this?
Almost every human rights violation has its root in poverty. This doesn't mean we ignore the dangerous practices of middle-eastern government. The fact is that these countries have enough money to easily avoid such conditions but choose not to, hence the outrage.
Workers from Africa/Asia are lured to the middle east for the promise of a good wage and the possibility of helping loved ones back home. When they get there, they have their passport taken, are given jobs which aren't remotely like those they were offered and are essentially forced to work as slaves in appalling conditions with no hope of ever leaving.
Google "qatar slavery world cup" and do some reading. Just one of many examples of this happening in the modern world, Dubai is another.
So, really what you're asking is "why should I care about slavery?"
I deleted my post. not because I'm not standing to my opinion. But "why should I care about slavery?" is a complete misinterpretation about what I said.
My point was that I think this should be fixed where the modern slaves come from. And not where they are.
My point was that fixing the symptom doesn't fix the cause, apparently no one got that or I did a terrible job at explaining it. I still stand by it though.
Society is capable of addressing more than one social issue at once. The social issues in Qatar that make it possible for these crimes to take place should not be neglected because there is oppressive poverty in the countries that Qatar sources their slaves from. Both need to be addressed.
I would like to stress that slavery in Qatar is not a mere symptom of social issues in the Philippines. It is symptomatic of deep flaws in Qatarien. How can I assert that with confidence? Because many other countries that are not Qatar do not condone keeping Filipino workers as slaves. How many passport deprived, exit-visa restrained migrant workers died during the construction Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in London? It sure as shit wasn't 900. It was none.
I did not read your original post, but I guess by "should be fixed where the modern slaves come from" you are talking about poor countries or poverty in general. If so:
Poverty is not the cause of slavery as a symptom, the symptoms of most poverty in the world today are bad working conditions, low pay, etc which workers do voluntarily, they mostly don't have another option than taking mean jobs, granted, but they can switch their employer, try to build a small business, etc. They can't do that if they are de facto slaves, living in a country where they have almost no rights and which they can't leave. My point is: bad jobs are a symptom of poverty, slavery is a symptom of very bad politics, despising human rights.
I see where you are coming from, but you are highly emotional in your discourse. If you were calmer and rational you could probably make your point without being "down voted to hell"
Talking about it and raising awareness make a lot of difference. In the end all the money from football comes from fans and marketing, with marketing representing a good part of it. Nobody will pay to have their image associated with this kind of things.
So the people who buy the products from the companies that incentive the governments to build the stadiums must know that they are killing people indirectly. We are not rational buyers, but the more explicit a matter becomes, the better we factor it into our buying process.
EDIT: Raising awareness on the fans also helps. You probably wouldn't go to a stadium to watch a game if there was a photo of someone who died building it glued to your seat or if their graveyard was courtside, it's all about making the end payer aware.
It's a tragic story, but it doesn't seem a good fit for HN. This is the sort of story that major media outlets should be reporting, and there's no technology angle.
The question was asked on a different thread earlier today, and I think it deserves asking here too:
What does this has to do on Hacker News?
Both articles are about groups are the lagging edge of development; both groups are made exclusively of one gender (although, unsurprising, only the other one used that aspect to hammer victimisation). Both issues are connected to an existing hardware technology that could be, but is not of interest to HN.
I read that kind of article (both) in my daily rotation outside of HN, so I don’t mind -- but I was wondering if HN commenters had felt the parallel, and would have reacted the same way on both.
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
This sounds like an interesting phenomenon in that I assume this wasn't the case at other recent major sporting events.
From the guidelines section (link at the bottom of the page):
Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.
Although I do concur that this post is off topic, what is or not pertinent to this site is a subjective matter resultant to the sum of the views of everyone(by points) and heavily biased towards the view of the few who control the site.
I too am breaking the same guideline if you extend it to comments, but there is no other way to let you know why you were downvoted by others (as there is no PM system AFAIK).
Wow, that was indeed violent. The worst thing is: I wasn’t complaining that it was off-topic; I was pointing at a different treatment of two off-topic events on the Front page, and how they were gender based.
For many people, hacker news is the only source of knowing shit happening in the world, be it innovation or injustice. Hence, if once in a while such stories do pop up, I like that.
Me too. My question was more about clarifying editorial guidelines. Commenting guidelines are already weird (I got pummeled for that one, even though I was the only one trying to explain the relevance for HN on the entire thread, and ask the community non-obvious questions) but I though starting by clarifying posting ones: is it neglected technical aspects, social issues, things that a world-changing company can make profit from?
In this case, the only solution that I see is automated construction using 3D-printing, most likely augmented by drones to scale. That would put most of those workers out of a job -- a situation probably worst off, and more deadly than the one they are in at the moment. It follows the disenfranching trend that Brynjolfsson gives to technology, and against yesterday’s parallel example (locally made menstruating pads in rural India).
I assumed talking about that was better that the tacitly racist ‘You know, Qatari have no respect for human lives…’ that fill this thread otherwise. It might sound true (family members living there tend to agree, vocally, but they aren’t exactly not-racists) but it seems far less productive than highlighting the works of some Qatari trying to change that.
Human rights and social wellbeing are generally of interest to educated people. Furthermore, quirks in the global legal system are interesting. I see nothing rendering this article unworthy of attention, other than the fact that it's perhaps old news.
It is absolutely worthy of attention -- my point was: what are the editorial guidelines of HackerNews? There are guidelines, as was pointed to me. Those guidelines are not exactly followed by the chunk of the community who confused my open question with a complaint and downvoted. I was curious how people read those guidelines in those two cases: are both up-voted by the same group? If human interest is key, why isn’t every Vice documentary here?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/25/zaha-hadid-qata...
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/german-architect...
http://www.arupassociates.com/en/case-studies/qatar-showcase...