Sweatshop Oppression

Kadia Escalante

University of Belize

Composing Process

Rhetorical Analysis

Sweatshop Oppression

Ravisankar begins his essay by relating to college students having lack of funds and relating to the problem at hand, which he states in the opening statement of the essay. The problem he identifies is the use of sweatshop labour in the search for low-cost products. Ravisankar assumes that his readers are educated yet not educated enough on the problem. His purpose in the essay is to bring awareness of the issue of sweatshop labour and what we can do to stop it. In order to accomplish this purpose, he appeals mainly to the producers. He also appeals to the consumers by giving an idea as to how they contribute to cheap labour. In his essay, Ravisankar addresses the main argument against his thesis, the idea that discouraging the use of sweatshops has a negative effect on the people in developing countries. Finally, he concludes by making the point that we can do something in order to alleviate the problem at hand. Overall, the argument Ravisankar makes is ineffective because he could have given more insight on the sweatshop workers and even statistics about the fatalities.

        The appeal to logic is used to propose why sweat shop labour shouldn’t be used, for example it was mentioned in detail the long hours, unhealthy facilities. It was effectively brought out by showing the reader just how egocentric these corporations are. In the essay, the writer states that “...multinational corporations are not interested in giving charity; they are interested in doing anything to increase profits."  Corporations are avaricious, they would rather make a slight profit than pay the workers a little more just to improve their quality of life in the sweatshops. Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Champion, Gap, Walmart, etc. are to be blamed for the actions of low cost labour. Ravisankar mentions these establishments because it is well known for its products, while doing this he conveys that “they are to blame for perpetuating a system of exploitation...”. He uses these ideas to draw our attention on how “we” should be aware of these global corporations that use sweatshops. Logos is used to show that trade unions and labour right activist aren’t against the location but against the inhumane activities that happen in the sweat shops.