Orwellianism is fairly common in our present day society, and many practices contribute

to this destructive society. For my topic, I chose the corporation Nike, and specified upon its use

of overseas labor. Overseas labor is something that has become much more common as of the

late twentieth century, and has only gotten worse since then. To dive into the topic of overseas

labor, I had to ask myself, why do these companies use overseas labor? And to this question,

there is one simple answer: money. Overseas labor, processes, and manufacturing are much

cheaper than producing locally, and maufacturing overseas can cut down many costs, allowing

companies to maximize their profits. Nike products are manufactured in about 40 countries

worldwide, including Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia. China, Ecuador, India, Malaysia,

Thailand, Indonesia, and Vietnam (McKay). The workers in these countries are subject to an

orwellian society due to the practices on display by Nike. Practices such as forced labor, low

wages, extremely poor working conditions, and even physical and verbal abuse restrict and

destroy the lifestyle of these workers. An article from the Washington Post states, “The Post’s

Anna Fifield visited a shoe factory in Qingdao producing sneakers for Nike and found that it

resembled a prison, with barbed wire, watchtowers, surveillance cameras and a dedicated police

station. Uighur workers at the factory, she was told, did not come on their own accord, nor could

they return home for the holidays” (Xiuzhong Xu and Leibold). This report alone describes

horrid conditions and forced labor. These are two things that can severely hinder a person’s

freedom and ultimately restricts them entirely from a free and open society. A second statement

from Business Insider says, “The public was shocked by reports of Indonesian Nike workers

earning as little as 14 cents an hour” (Lutz). Low wages are another way to obstruct an open

society, as these workers are getting paid non-livable wages. Finally, another source from an

Australian professor states, “'In one year, Nike paid Michael Jordan [pictured above] as much
(about $25m) to pitch the shoes as its subcontractors paid 35,000 Vietnamese to make

them”(Beder 27). This shows that it is not a lack of resources to provide these workers with

adequate pay and conditions, but rather these workers are not a priority in comparison to their

marketing practices. In conclusion, Nike corporation’s overseas practices are unacceptable and

extremely detrimental to these worker’s right to a free and open society.