Kristof begins his essay by addressing
Obama and his team. He then goes on to describe Phenom Penh as a Dante-like hell and offers to give a tour of the area.
The problem he identifies is that
sweatshops are not being exploited enough. Kristof assumes his readers are
unaware of how the locals would prefer to work in a factory then scrounging for
income. His purpose in this essay is to allow the
reader to see from the locals point of view on sweat shops and how it helps the
families.
In order to accomplish this purpose, he appeals mainly to pathos. He
does this by quoting
some of the mothers saying they wish for the children to
be able to work in a sweat shop with a steady income to help raise out of poverty.
He also using pathos when stating how the train has ran over multiple children,
the children cannot afford to go to the doctor and in the shade. He also
appeals logos by stating that the sweat shops are safer for children to work
in, smell better and cleaner.
In his essay, Kristof addresses the main argument
against his thesis, the idea that labor standards can improve wages and working
conditions without greatly affecting the eventual retail cost of goods. He
refutes this argument by saying it is more likely that with high wages, the one
hiring would often demand brides or some of the wages in order to get the job.
Finally, he concludes by making the point that
even though Americans find it hard to accept, the workers prefer the factory
over the alternative work. Overall,
the argument Kristof makes is effective because he is showing the positive effects
the sweat shops have on the locals.
