August 2006 Archives

Some background (scholars of international politics please correct any errors)

India has a multiple-party system of democratic government that means parties have to work together and build alliances. Since gaining its independence from Britain, India has mostly been governed by a party called the Indian National Congress. It's left-leaning, sort of. Its primary opposition is the BJP, a hindu nationalist party, the religious right of India.

Five states in india have enacted limited bans on Coca-Cola but the state of Kerala is the first to ban it entirely. Kerala is one of the most left-leaning states in India, it also has the country's highest literacy rate, highest life expectancy, lowest infant mortality, lowest population growth, etc. As of this year's elections, the state government is controlled by the Left Democratic Front, a coalition to the left of the Indian National Congress. The right-wing BJP has no seats in the Kerala state assembly.

The struggle against Coke in Kerala has gone on for years, on several fronts, but state-level efforts were often overturned at the federal or judicial stage. They'd tried legal battles over the groundwater and the toxic sludge stuff before. It's likely that the the Left Democratic Front winning the majority in the state government is what finally enabled the ban to take place. And now, unsurprisingly, the Indian federal government is disputing Kerala's claims of pesticide contamination.

What makes a democratic left-wing party like the Indian National Congress beholden to corporate interests? In part, pressure from the U.S. government. Consider the statement made by Frank Lavin, the Bush administration's undersecretary for international trade, disapproving of the Coke & Pepsi ban: "When India is working hard to attract and retain foreign investment, it would be unfortunate if the discussion were dominated by those who did not want to treat foreign companies fairly." The rhetoric of "fairness" is pretty funny, as what Lavin really wants is preferential treatment for multinationals, the ability to overrule local democratic decision-making. Consider also the $380,000 donated by Coca-Cola to the 2004 Bush campaign. Probably a wise investment.

Subtext: India, still struggling to emerge from colonialism, is facing significant environmental and humanitarian crises, as well as a heated relationship with Pakistan. Developed countries have pushed trade agreements and "development aid" (with strings attached) supposedly offering "help", but this isn't motivated by altruism, but the promise of expanded reach and global market dominance.

So this issue with fizzy-sugar-water and India is one that has very real tangible effects on the welfare and survival of people in that country, but it's also a symbolic struggle for a country that is still being forced to fight for their independence more than half-a-century after escaping British rule.

Vandana Shiva is one of the world's foremost radical scientists and is a leading voice of the anti-globalization movement. As what Gramsci would call an organic intellectual, Shiva has firsthand experience with the issues she writes and speaks about, and how they affect the women of the third world. Here's a podcast-sized lecture she gave last year at MIT. (MP3, 59:00)

Shiva gives us the vocabulary to understand what is going on in with Coke in India: not just corporate misbehavior, but corporate colonialism. Thus, the "Coca-Cola quit India" campaign directly borrows the language of Gandhi's campaign to get the British to "quit India". Like Gandhi, Shiva is convinced that individual acts of conscience connected in organized resistance are the way forward. While most of us will never have the opportunity to physically stand alongside Shiva as she blockades the bottling plants, we are not powerless. As consumers who have the privilege of consumer choice, we can choose to do business only with socially responsible companies. As U.S. citizens who have the privilege of democratic government and freedom of assembly (without getting shot by Coke's thugs), we can lobby our government and our peers to action. And as creative people with the privilege of free expression we can choose not to let our ideas and creative energies get used in service of the corporate ogre. We can refuse to be complicit.

I know how cheesy this sounds, but that's how it goes with irreducible truths, and anyway I am following the instructions of Some Velvet Sidewalk: "Let us fear no cliches!"

If you're interested in hearing more from Shiva, I'd start with Staying Alive, a book which is notable for the way it links ecological crises, colonialism, class & economic "development", and the oppression of women. Of particular interest to me is the way Shiva draws on the religious teachings of her native tradition, showing how Hindu concepts and goddesses function as sources of ecofeminist wisdom, passed down from generation to generation. It's counterintuitive and exciting, if like me you're used to thinking of traditional religion as generally androcentric and patriarchal, especially in the "developing world".

Edit: I initially failed to credit Freeman Z, for generously hosting this recording.

A press release:

The Coca-Cola Co. is inviting consumers to participate in the evolution of the brand's heritage by re-launching www.coca-cola.com as its new brand site and basing it on "The Coke Side of Life," the company's new global marketing platform.

As part of the launch, the site's content will be driven by a series of bi-weekly and monthly consumer challenges, which will be posted on www.coca-cola.com. The goal of the site is to organically develop into a global user-generated content portal with three key differentiations from other consumer marketing sites: first, visitors are given a theme/challenge to focus their creativity and are provided tools to develop their ideas; second, winners of the challenges are rewarded for their input, and; third, users gain access to a truly global community, which is invited to judge their entries. These features will allow visitors to have a more inclusive role in the company's creative process."

So wait, their new marketing plan is a ripoff of the ultimate blogger?

I am grossed out and apalled in so many ways. I feel like puking. I feel betrayed by...someone, I don't even know who. What is going on? Did anyone know this was happening? I would appreciate some answers.

Shock and disgust turns to to dark comedy as I keep reading:

""Throughout Coke's history, we have seen people use the brand, its icons and heritage as a creative source," said Marc Mathieu, senior vice president [pictured below], Global Core Brands, for the Atlanta-based company. "In the 60's, it was Andy Warhol. Today, it's people all over the world on the internet developing their own interpretations of the brand. We believe the independent creative process is a vital part of our heritage. With this site, we want to give a further opportunity for these imaginative minds to be part of our creative process."
"

Never mind that Warhol was mocking and critiquing Coke & mass-produced homogenous culture. Creativity=making your own coke ads? This is the "independent creative process"? So says the millionaire dude with the killer 'stache. And yet this totally proves Thomas Frank's prediction that the rise of interactive media would only serve to increase brand loyalty by fostering more personal investment in the brand.

Still there is hope. The movement is growing. Coca-Cola now has been banned in parts of india due to to its groundwater contamination. I am convinced that no matter how much money they throw into "funny" "entertaining" annoying ads that look like stupid video games as redesigned by busby berkeley, the Coke empire will not last, once people know this company's history of exploitation and abuse in the third world, as well as what is going down in the US.

Have you watched this Frontline special? It's an overview of the situation in Columbia. Again, this is just the tip of the iceberg. There's also the stuff in India, and the US.

Which side are you on? Which side are you on? This is not a rhetorical question, friends. I want to know which side you, personally, are on. Are you on the side of helping a handful of rich white guys get the world addicted to sickly sweet fizz with no nutritive value? Are you on the side of unionbusting thugs and environmental devastation? Are you with Coke and W+K? Or are you with the workers? Are you on the side of the third world? Are you on the side of Vandana Shiva and the people of India?

I am sorry if this offends or alienates anyone, but this is too serious to fuck around.

Portlanders, I have an idea for a protest mobilization in October. Let me know if you're interested.