What mom wouldn’t love to receive some sweet chocolate treats on this Mother’s Day? How about the mom who knows that these exquisite chocolates are made from cocoa being harvested by children who are forced to work in the cocoa jungle and in some cases sold into slavery? Could a mother who has been informed about the facts of the cocoa industry, a mother who knows that 200,000 children are being forced to work on cocoa farms in west Africa—long days, dangerous work, toxic sprays, gruelling labour—could a mother who knows the facts really enjoy the chocolate these poor children have helped produce?
Be assured unless you’ve purchased certified FairTrade chocolate for your mother, children have been abused in the production of the cocoa from which that chocolate has been made, whether it’s from Ganong Bros or Hershey’s. The chocolate industry excels in keeping this information secret, just as the clothing industry has kept secrets, some of which became public in the last couple weeks. After the factory collapse in Bangladesh that killed over 300 people on April 24th, we’ve become concerned about these clothing factories and the working conditions in them, but have we really become concerned enough to demand change? Loblaw’s Joe Fresh is compensating victims’ families and has resolved to ensure safer working conditions in Bangladeshi factories in the future. What about the other clothing retailers? Silence. Eighteen months before this tragedy, a fire in a Bangladesh textile factory killed 112 people. Walmart considered ensuring safer factories by doing regular inspections, but concluded that such inspections “could ultimately lead to higher costs for Walmart and higher prices for our customers. This would not be in the best interests of Walmart’s shareholders and customers and would place Walmart at a competitive disadvantage” (Financial Post). Unfortunately, it would seem that we would rather let these companies keep their secrets because, after all, we love falling prices at Walmart and chocolate bars that cost less than a dollar.
We need mothers and others to stand up to the chocolate makers and say no more child abuse, unfair and unsafe child labour and child slavery. Surely our moral conscious can’t let us ignore the plight of 200,000 children in west Africa. Buying FairTrade chocolate will help, but the whole industry needs to change. FairTrade shouldn’t be a label on a select few chocolate bars, it should obviously be the norm, but today in Canada only one regular confectionary chocolate bar is certified FairTrade. Cadbury Dairy Milk is the only FairTrade chocolate bar, and it’s only the original Cadbury Dairy Milk bar, none of the specially flavoured ones. Every Kit Kat and Hershey’s bar has been produced by children doing things no mother would ever imagine their own children doing. Sobering thoughts for Mother’s Day, but it’s pretty important that we actually become aware of the truth if anything is going to change.
Notes: For documentation of claims about chocolate made in this blog posting, please read my previous post “The children producing the cocoa never taste the chocolate” which includes a clip for an outstanding video documentary. My regrets that I am not better informed about the clothing and textiles industry. I just saw in the news this week how we become so concerned in the midst of tragedy but so quick to forget when shopping for low prices—so parallel to my findings in cocoa production and chocolate sales.
It’s great going to church on Easter Sunday and finding that the place is packed. Why should we ever complain about the church being too full? I’ve sat in almost empty churches before – not fun, quite disheartening. Yet some regular church attenders can be quite put out when they come on Easter Sunday and find the parking lot is full and “strangers” are sitting in their regular seats. Yes, these are those Christians who complain about the “Holly and Lily Christians” who only show up at Christmas and Easter.
Personally, I don’t understand why people would only come to church two or three times a year, but I think it’s great that they come for Easter Sunday. It is the resurrection of Jesus that gives meaning to that Sunday and to all our Sunday church services. When the priest / pastor declares, “Christ is Risen!,” on Easter Sunday, I like hearing that large crowd sound of everyone responding together, “He is Risen Indeed.” If you’re only going to come one or twice a year, you couldn’t pick a better Sunday than Easter Sunday. So keep coming back!
Rather than moaning that these people only show up twice a year, why don’t we do our best to celebrate Easter Sunday, pull out all the stops, sing the best songs, hear the clear exposition of the Scriptures, feel the warmth of true Christian fellowship, and participate in the most joyous Communion feast of the year. Why don’t we give people a reason to come back the following Sunday? What if the experience of Easter Sunday was so compelling that people would be eager to return next week? Think: crowds following Jesus. What kept them coming back?
The reality is that far few people attend church than who claim to follow Christ, and maybe the church is partly to blame. Philip Yancey wrote a fascinating book on this subject called Church: Why Bother? He talks about a period of his life in which he decided not to attend church, but to support it from the outside, “I am not alone… Some of them have stories similar to mine: they feel burned or even betrayed by a former church experience. Others simply ‘get nothing out of church.’” (p.20) We can dismiss these reasons, many do, or we can attempt to address them as valid concerns. I know I don’t like being bored at church. I know it’s painful when you feel betrayed by your pastor. And I know how good it is to be in a church that promotes healing in those hurt relationships and sees no benefit in being boring for the sake of tradition. Why should people bother coming to church? And when they do come why wouldn’t we celebrate it rather than complain? Britney Spears has made the headlines for all kinds of things as we all know, but I think it’s pretty cool that she hit the headlines today just for going to church on Easter. I can be happy about that.
So let me suggest a new way to respond to those “Holly and Lily Christians.” How about saying, “Happy Easter! Great to see you” (or Merry Christmas on that other Sunday). Why not be brave and go further? “It’s great to see you today. I don’t think I’ve seen you since Christmas. I don’t know if you’d have any ideas, but I’ve been working on this project to redesign how we do church on Sundays. Do you have any ideas of what would make our church services more interesting, more compelling and more relevant to people? Any thoughts?” Now, of course, church is not entertainment or just crowd pleasing, so there may be answers that won’t be helpful, but I suspect some of the answers would be very interesting. We must ask ourselves how we’ve taken such a relevant message of great news and made it seem irrelevant to so many people today.
Chapters Indigo sent me an interesting email last week, something like this:
You can click on the pic above, for Chapter !ndigo’s full list of 50 books, definitely some very good books. It seems to me that they forgot THE book that has changed far more lives than any of these. It has been more widely read than any of these 50 books and translated into more languages than all of these books put together. Martin Luther’s translation of THIS book reformed the German language much as the King James translation has shaped the English language. It is THE book that has forever changed my life and continues to transform my future. My source of hope, inspiration and direction. Reading it is unlike any other book, for in it the faithful hear God speak to them, an experience to which we must humbly respond, “Only let us live up to what we have already attained” (Philippians 3:16). If you’re going to make a list of books that will change your life, how could you possibly not include the most life changing book of all, The Holy Bible?
Michele Bachmann for President!? How about Michele Bachmann for Pastor? I don’t see her as a strong candidate for President of the United States, but after hearing Michele Bachmann preach at a church in Iowa, I’m convinced she would be a great candidate for becoming a pastor. It’s true she won the Ames Straw Poll last week in Iowa, but why did she win it? Wasn’t it because of Bachmann’s compelling Christian testimony and her faith-inspired conservative values? If so, isn’t this poll really telling us that Bachmann would be a great pastor more so than telling us she would be a good president? I really think she could be a great pastor. She would have to drop the political rhetoric and stick to her more compelling message about her faith, her experience as a Christian, and what she’s learned from the Bible. If she could do that, I could see her being a serious candidate for becoming a pastor. Bachmann’s passion would be far better applied on this church track rather than on this bid to become President.
Michele Bachmann is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, representing Minnesota, the first Republican woman to represent that state in Congress. In Washington DC, Bachmann founded and chairs the Tea Party Caucus within Congress. Now, with little to no political accomplishments, she’s a candidate for the Republican nomination in the 2012 U.S. presidential election. And she seems to be very focused on winning the Iowa Caucuses which is the first step toward that goal. The Ames straw poll victory certainly helps her.
In the midst of this campaigning in Iowa, on Sunday, July 24, Michele Bachmann spoke at a conservative Christian church that bans women from leadership and preaching. New Life Community Church Pastor Brian Hagerman explained, “We generally would not have a woman to come to specifically teach because we feel God calls men as pastors to be the primary teachers of their churches.” Yet they did invite Michele Bachmann to this church in Marion, Iowa to “share her testimony”—to speak as one believer to fellow believers about what God had done and is doing in her life. They just did not want her teaching the Bible or speaking too heavily about politics.
Doesn’t this beg the question as to whether Pastor Hagerman and the members of his church would actually vote for Michele Bachmann to become president? If you do not believe that women should be leaders or preachers in the church, would you be able to support a woman taking on the highest leadership role in the country? Often the belief that woman cannot lead in the church is accompanied by other conservative values like the belief that the man is “the head of household”—the key decision maker and the preference to see women staying at home rather than being in the workforce. I’ve certainly been in conservative churches that do not believe women should run for political office. In fairness, though, when asked the question, Pastor Hagerman said, “Outside of specifically leading a church or pastoring a church, I personally don’t read in scripture that God says a man can have this job and a woman have this job.” That seems a bit conflicted to me to believe that a woman cannot lead a church of 200 people but could lead one of the most powerful nations in the world.
Today, there are a growing number of churches which recognize that Jesus fully included women in his teaching ministry and appointed a few of these female disciples to be the very first witnesses of his resurrection. To believe that only men should be leaders in the church like they do in Marion, Iowa is to disregard a lot of evidence for women in leadership in the New Testament church. The Apostle Paul, for example, when writing to the Romans, sends greetings to 27 people who helped to lead the church in Rome and 10 of them are women, more than one-third of the church’s leadership. He clearly identifies some of their titles and positions in the church such as Junia the “outstanding” apostle, Priscilla his “co-worker,” and Mary, Tryphena and Tryphosa who “worked very hard” for the church. Not only that, this letter to the Romans which some regard as Paul’s greatest theological work was delivered to Rome by Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae. It is more than likely that she would’ve presented it to the church in Rome, having been commended to the church by Paul, thus preaching the words written by the apostle. Given this reality of women in leadership in the New Testament era church, there is no reason why women should not be serving as teachers, preachers and pastors in our churches today.
Michele Bachmann is a strong candidate to become a pastor. Though New Life Community Church in Iowa said that Bachmann was not to teach from the Bible, in her speech that day, she preached a sermon, easily the best preaching I’ve heard this year. It was great. She was interesting and engaging as she shared how she grew up in the church yet somehow missed the gospel, but later did become a Christian and decided to live as a Christian making a difference in this world just as God was calling her to do. And, then, she riveted everyone’s attention as she opened the Bible and began to preach. “This is a wonderful story in 1 Samuel 14 that I want to share with you.... [King] Saul was so disheartened that he didn’t know what to do. But his son Jonathan did not give up hope. He had a heart that would not be defeated. He had a heart that said we can do this.” Bachmann continued, narrating through this incredible biblical story of courage and faith. Then, with Billy Graham-like passion, she made that Scripture come alive to every person listening, as she preached, “Oftentimes challenges that come into our life, whether they are small or whether they are large like Jonathan was facing—those challenges are often brilliantly disguised by our God as an opportunity for him to show his greatness. That he is powerful to save. And so I say to you this morning... never look at a challenge and think that you go it alone. Never think that we serve a God who is not mighty to save. He prevails.... Don’t think for a moment that he is not more powerful yet to save.” Amen!
I’ve had the opportunity to hear several new preachers fresh out of seminary preach this year as well as a few seasoned pastors. None of them had even a quarter of the passion and power with which Michele Bachmann delivered that message. Look, I don’t understand her political views or how the Republicans could even consider her to be a good candidate for the presidency when she actually advocated for defaulting on the U.S. debt, but I do know that Michele Bachmann can preach. She’s a passionate Christian who sincerely wants to live for God. When you look at what is best about Michele Bachmann’s campaign presentations in Iowa—her biblical preaching, her faith and her Christian values, let’s be serious, she is a great candidate for becoming a pastor. I, for one, would vote for her to be pastor of a church, but not President of the United States.
It sounds like a good news story, doesn’t it? Nestle is really helping Ivory Coast by distributing saplings that will grow into disease-resistant cocoa trees. This will greatly boost productivity and improve the quality of the cocoa beans. But is this really a good news story? What about the quality of life for the 200,000 children who labour in the cocoa jungles of Ivory Coast? What about the child slaves trafficked from Burkino Faso and Mali included in that number? Why isn’t Nestle doing something to help these children? They could’ve linked the distribution of these new cocoa trees to programs that are working to eliminate child slavery and end the worst forms of child labour.
The good news story is actually happening in Cameroon, the fourth largest cocoa-producing country. Companies like Mars and Cadbury have been impressed by research that shows that farmers in Cameroon cultivate cocoa trees in a more sustainable way that essentially preserves and renews the rainforest. This is in great contrast to the monoculture cocoa farms of the Ivory Coast where the rainforest is being razed and then with time the cocoa trees are becoming less productive. What impresses me even more is that Cameroon does not have the same high rate of child labour that keeps children from attending school nor is the country known for the same extensive practice of child trafficking and slavery. Martin Gilmour, UK-based cocoa research manager for Mars, says, “We would like to see farmers get higher prices for their cocoa. It would be better for both of us.” And it would help to eliminate the so-called “need” for child labour. So Cargill, a big cocoa purchaser and bulk chocolate producer for companies like Cadbury and Mars, is rolling out its UTZ certification farmer training programme in Cameroon which should dramatically boost their sustainable cocoa output. This UTZ certification means working with the ILO to eliminate the worst forms of child labour which includes slavery and denial of schooling. Thus, Cameroon is already in a better position than Ivory Coast when it comes to child labour and now the chocolate companies are seeing the benefit of investing in Cameroon’s cocoa production in a way that will go further to eliminating the worst forms of child labour and improving sustainability. Excellent! Now why wasn’t this good news story broadcast on TV?
Finally, summer time makes is a great time to tell Hershey’s that we want more from our S’mores! That’s right, we want fair trade chocolate in our S’mores. Hershey’s Chocolate made S’mores to be the popular treat they are, but they don’t produce any fair trade chocolate bars. As a chocolate company they continue to show a resistance to doing anything about the serious child labour and slavery problem in West Africa. I mentioned above that Mars and Cadbury are speaking up and Cargill is listening, but Hershey remains silent. Raise the Bar, Hershey is an excellent website giving many practical ways for us to get involved in the fight against child slavery and abusive child labour in West Africa.
P.S. It’s hard to ever truly find a good news story when it comes to cocoa coming from West Africa. The sources I cited above may have not been entirely accurate in their assessment of child labour in Cameroon’s cocoa industry. This episode of the BBC World TV series "Survivors Guide" looks at the ILO’s project in Cameroon. Sobering, to say the least.
Superman renounced his U.S. citizenship! Fox News got all upset and Mike Huckabee was disturbed last month when Action Comics #900 was released. I just had to get my own copy of this comic — no small feat as the publicity caused it to sell out fast everywhere. In spite of the media frenzy, the comic book story wasn’t really about Superman renouncing his U.S. citizenship. (Mike Huckabee who was so disturbed by this notion had not even bothered to read the comic before condemning it.) The story was more about the limitations of a superhero and how little Superman could actually do during the protests of the Arab Spring. Superman chose to stand with a large group of peaceful, non-resistant protesters demonstrating in Iran. He admitted this was a problem he couldn’t solve with his superpowers, but he could show his support and he did by standing with them — an action which landed Superman in trouble with the U.S. government. (Since Fox News doesn’t want him, we’ll glady give Superman Canadian citizenship. After all his Fortress of Solitude has always been in the Canadian Arctic.)
June, as it turns out, was quite the month for the iconic superhero. It saw the 10-year series finale of Smallville, the show all about the coming of age of Superman (Clark Kent). After watching it, a good friend of mine said, “It was pretty good even though I never watched Smallville before. They built up the anticipation and made you want to see Superman fly.” Humoured, I replied, “The anticipation you experienced in those two hours, I’ve been experiencing over the last 10 years! They definitely built up the anticipation. I’ve been watching and waiting for 10 years now to see the blue suit, the red cape, the first flight and the emergence of Superman.”
Action Comics #900 (and other Superman comics too), the TV series Smallville and even the song “Superman (It’s not easy)” by Five for Fighting are examples of the postmodern revision of Superman. In these last few years, we’ve learned that behind the legend and the cape, there is suffering — a vulnerable hero, sometimes unsure of himself, lonely and insecure, hurting but hoping. And we had thought he was almost a god, invincible and invulnerable, a superhuman alien, the last son of Krypton. Tom Welling in Smallville and Brandon Routh in Superman Returns have revealed this more human, more sympathetic, and more vulnerable side of Superman. In the 2006 movie Superman almost dies, sacrificing himself to save the earth. This whole new way of understanding Superman’s limitations and his “humanness” may have begun in the remarkable 1992 comic “The Death of Superman.”
This revision of Superman really does make sense. When I think back to my childhood dream of becoming Superman and being able to defeat every foe and solve every problem while never being hurt by anyone nor feeling any of this world’s pain, I realize now that wasn’t quite realistic. Seriously, how could a hero, a true hero, be untouched and uninvolved in this world’s suffering? To be a hero these days, Superman must push himself through constant trials, experience pain, and be willing to sacrifice himself. Contrast the Brandon Routh Superman of Superman Returns (2006) who struggles intensely and must use every ounce of his ingenuity, strength and speed to save a passenger jet spinning out of control — contrast him with the Christopher Reeve Superman of the original Superman movie (1978) who effortlessly rescued Air Force One by subbing in for an engine. This new young hero raised in Smallville who goes through trials and struggles to become Superman is truly a superhero.
What 9/11 taught us about heroes is that they sacrifice themselves to save others, they put themselves in harm’s way, they suffer and more often than we realized, they die in the line of duty. In Canada, the Highway of Heroes is the road travelled when fallen soldiers are returned from Afghanistan. People line the way, standing with firefighters and other emergency workers to pay tribute to our military heroes. Christians ought to pay close attention to this redefinition of “heroes” and revision of Superman. After all, we follow a Saviour who said, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me” (Matthew 16:24).
Yet the church is still caught up in the modern era triumphalism that produced the invincible and invulnerable Superman. Whey else would we think it odd when we as Christians are touched by and involved in this world’s suffering? Why do we question the goodness of God when a young father is diagnosed with terminal cancer? Why do we as Christians believe that we should feel no pain and be healed from all diseases? Why are we so prone to insist that God should intervene at every turn and save us from harm? (Really listen to our group prayers! See what we really believe.) We don’t expect a fellow believer to land a lousy job and be underpaid or to suffer from depression or to be unable to save their marriage. Why do we protest so loudly when the way is hard and the path uncertain? Isn’t it true that the church today celebrates success, wealth and victory? Triumph to triumph!
Perhaps we’ve gotten our heroes of the faith all wrong by worshipping success. Maybe this isn’t God’s way of changing the world. Isn’t it just possible that the heroes God calls us to be in this world will struggle and be unsure at times, be vulnerable and caught up in this misery of this world, perhaps find themselves alone, hurting yet hoping. I suspect these are exactly the kind of heroes God is using to change the world. Consider again the Beatitudes, that list of what God rewards. As Christians, aren’t we called to follow the way of our real Superhero, Jesus?
And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Superhero and Perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart. (Hebrews 12:1b-3, NIV but improved)
Here’s the reason I wrote this article on today’s Superman: We need a better way to translate the Greek word αρχηγος (archagos) which is used to describe Jesus four times in the New Testament (The verse above, Hebrews 12:2, and 2:10; Acts 3:15, 5:31). Our typical translations like “author” and “pioneer” fall way short of the powerful meaning packed in the Greek word αρχηγος. Though they get at some aspect of the meaning, I don’t think terms like this say enough. The mighty Hercules, really the ancient Greek version of Superman, the half-human and half-divine hero, was called both αρχηγος and saviour — superhero and saviour. These are exactly the Greek terms used of Jesus in Acts 5:31! Anyone familiar with the legend of Hercules wouldn’t imagine calling him an “author” or a “pioneer,” certainly not a “prince”—such words do not do him justice. Nor do I think that such weak translations of αρχηγος, though they convey some element of truth, are adequate translations of this title when applied to Jesus. It would be much better to capitalize on today’s understanding of what makes a hero and proclaim Jesus to be our Superhero and Saviour (rather than “Prince and Saviour” as in the NIV of Acts 5:31). He is the one who can show us how to make a difference in this world.
When I read what Hebrews 2:10-18 says about Jesus, I see a hero who shared in our humanity, suffered in his flesh and sacrificed himself for us. Through the trials, temptations and suffering, he proved himself faithful. Because of what he experienced, Jesus is merciful toward us, ready to help us, able to make us like himself, faithful to the end. This Superhero saves us, inspires us and is transforming us to be like himself in this world. It may not be easy, but these are the heroes the world needs to see emerging from the church today, real heroes who will make a difference.
In late June, Ganong Bros. Ltd, Canada’s oldest chocolate factory, announced a $10 million expansion that will increase the size of their factory by 10%, add 30-40 jobs and allow them to potentially increase their sales volume by 25%. This was made possible in part by $5 million in loans from the province and the federal government, but it seems to me this “good” news is actually “bittersweet” at best.
At the June 24 announcement, Premier David Alward said, “This is a very positive day for Charlotte County, for St. Stephen and more importantly for New Brunswick.” It seems the premier was assuming the 30-40 news jobs would be going to people in St. Stephen and Charlotte County, but at this same event David Ganong, chair of the board, made clear they would outsource the jobs if they could not find qualified New Brunswickers. They’ve previously hired dozens of foreign workers. New Brunswick’s unemployment is at 9.5% and with the province now putting $3 million toward this new expansion, you would think asking Ganong Bros. to guarantee that jobs would go to New Brunswickers, even if training was required, would’ve been smart. So the news is not as good as it could have been.
The federal government, through the Atlantic Canadian Opportunities Agency, put $2 million toward the expansion at the St. Stephen factory which is happening in part because Ganong Bros. landed a long-term contract with a major international customer, with the details still being top secret. This introduces international trade issues which no one spoke about at the announcement.
Ganong Bros. makes a variety of chocolate and candy confections, but they do not source their own cocoa beans or even make their own chocolate. They purchase bulk chocolate which is melted and used to create the fine chocolate treats Canadians have enjoyed from Ganong for 138 years now, including Delecto assorted chocolates and Chicken Bones. It’s common practice, nearly ever chocolatier in Canada uses bulk chocolate. No one wants to talk about the serious ethical issues involved in the purchase and resale of bulk chocolate, but the federal government ought to take a stand.
Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana supply about 67% of the world’s chocolate, but it is increasingly coming to light that both countries have children labouring in the cocoa jungles. In many cases, children do not go to school, but instead work long hard days doing work far too dangerous for them. CBC Reporter Carol Off investigated the dark side of the cocoa industry in her book Bitter Chocolate and the BBC Panorama documentary Chocolate: The Bitter Truth backed up her findings and presented more evidence. What is this bitter truth? The children who labour so hard to produce the cocoa never taste the Ganong chocolates or any other chocolate for that matter. Not only are children forced to work, but the desperately poor cocoa farmers have also resorted to trafficking children from other West African countries and putting them to work as slaves. We know this is happening and, yet, to date, Canada has done nothing about it, continuing to import the West African cocoa beans and doing nothing to discourage the practice of child labour and child slavery.
We can’t pretend this investment from our federal government at Ganong Bros. is not a failure to do something to help change the plight of the children of West Africa. Why couldn’t the federal government, for example, have made their investment contingent on Ganong Bros. committing to making 25% of their chocolate products from Fair Trade chocolate (which improves the working conditions for children, gets them into school, and eliminates slavery). How long will Canadians be content to happily eat chocolate produced from cocoa harvested by child labourers and child slaves?
Jesus said, “Whatever you did not do for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did not do for me” (Matt 23:45). Don’t we have a moral obligation to work against slavery, especially to end child trafficking and slavery? Or should we just go one indulging in our Ganong chocolate truffles pretending that we’re not contributing to the forced labour of children in West Africa? Can we treat our kids with Kit Kats and Snickers while ignoring the plight of the children who produce the cocoa but never taste the chocolate? I can’t do it anymore. And I would like to see Canada do something about it. I’m writing to the New Brunswick premier, the federal minister responsible for ACOA and others; I’ll keep you posted.
In the meantime, I was going to post the fourth and final installment of the documentary Chocolate: The Bitter Truth, just in case you have not finished viewing it as I have previously posted the first three parts. Unfortunately, the high quality youtube video I had previously posted is no longer available. I’ll post this video which is part 4 of 5. You can click on the youtube button to find the fifth part. Listen carefully, it’s alarming.
Notes: For documentation of claims about chocolate made in this blog posting, please read my previous post “The children producing the cocoa never taste the chocolate” which includes a clip for an outstanding video documentary. My regrets that I am not better informed about the clothing and textiles industry. I just saw in the news this week how we become so concerned in the midst of tragedy but so quick to forget when shopping for low prices—so parallel to my findings in cocoa production and chocolate sales.
