Ethical Consumption in an Unethical System
By William Fenimore
Originally, this was going to be an article showcasing all of the ways the brand Canada Goose contributes negatively to our society, both in an environmental and social sense. I got a few paragraphs into this hit piece and then looked down at my shoes: Nike. The many problems Nike has had with ethical labor are well documented and widely known. The person that made my shoes most definitely was not working in conditions that OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) would deem acceptable. This got me thinking about whether I have the right to stand on this imaginary moral high ground and criticize Canada Goose and their consumers based off of the company’s violent treatment of coyotes and geese. I went further to consider whether anyone has any right to harp on others’ unethical consumption of fashion. In the current system, it is virtually impossible to consume only ethically produced clothing and ethically sourced clothes are usually more expensive and less accessible which is an issue on its own. The only way to be an ethical consumer is to not consume at all, which is not an option. However, the immorality of fashion consumerism does not mean that we cannot have these conversations about the ethics of different clothing brands and companies. It does mean that we must alter our conversations to acknowledge the hypocrisy of pointing out the lack of ethics of certain brands when we consume and support other brands with similar immoralities. It is always valuable to spread awareness about popular brands’ unethical practices. However, doing so without acknowledging your own hypocrisies is not effective.
Unfortunately, the majority of the brands most popular with Middlebury students conduct themselves unethically; it is not just Canada Goose and Nike. L.L Bean, Abercrombie and Fitch, Fila, Dickies, Lacoste, The North Face, Tommy Hillfiger’s, and many other brands to this day benefit from the slave labor of the Uyghar Muslims in China. Uniqlo, Adidas, Gap, and H&M all utilize some form of child labor. Shein, Zara, Forever 21, and ASOS, are among the worst brands in fashion for the environment. You would be hard pressed to find a single Middlebury student without at least one piece of clothing from any of these brands. This is not just limited to Middlebury either, the consumerism and marketing strategies of the fashion industry have global effects
Artwork by Grace Valentine
The prevalence of immorality in fashion is why we must avoid riding the moral ‘high horse’. All of us engage in unethical purchases and it is important to bake this into our messaging about consumerism in the clothing industry and its issues. This will make the message much more receivable to our audience, as they won’t feel like we are attacking or judging them for buying clothes. Clearly people do not support these brands because they as consumers are unethical; they support them because they like their products, their products are accessible to them, or they are just a fan of the brand. All of these reasons are okay, and there is no need for justification. If, when addressing the woes of consumerism, we fail to recognize that we too are a part of the problem and instead take ourselves too seriously and guilt the audience into thinking they are bad people, our message won’t be effective. People do not want to feel bad about themselves, especially about factors that are out of their control. It is much more valuable if we give the audience manageable and realistic alternatives. Spread the message that the best thing you can do for the environment and its inhabitants is to buy less. Try to stay away from the fast fashion cycles pushed by social media. Obviously if you see something cool that you want, don’t be afraid to buy it, but first take a look in your closet and make sure there isn’t something there that is interchangeable.
One of the main arguments against this claim that everyone engages in the unethical consumption of goods in the current fashion system, is that brands like Patagonia or Skida exist and are successful. These brands participate in the Fair Trade regulations, are sustainably sourced, and offer extensive recycling programs. Patagonia’s Worn Wear program is an excellent method of fighting against the fast fashion cycles. Being able to return Patagonia clothing, after wearing it for years, for a brand new piece of the same item is an excellent deal and encourages buying fewer, higher quality pieces. While there are many positives to supporting Patagonia, the main issue with this brand is that it is very expensive. The cheapest t-shirt on the Patagonia website is $35. Compare this to H&M which sells t-shirts for $6, it is hard to justify paying nearly six times the price. When ethics and sustainability are taken into consideration, the price of production increases, and therefore the selling point of the goods increases. When companies pay employees living wages instead of utilizing sweatshops, and source their materials sustainably, they have to charge more to cover the increased costs. Because of this, many consumers find themselves facing the dilemma of consuming unethically, but affordably, or consuming ethically at a higher cost. The high price of sustainable clothing by brands such as Patagonia or Skida is the reason that everyone doesn’t buy ethically.
In our current clothing industry system, everyone consumes unethically. It is nearly impossible for anyone to consume completely ethically. Even though this is the case, it is still possible to have constructive conversations about ethical consumption. During these conversations, it is important to address the hypocritical nature of the conversation. We can discuss the issues of Canada Goose even if we have Nike shoes, as long as during that discussion we acknowledge that we also support unethical brands and that it is impossible not to. It is important to continue having these conversations as they bring awareness to the unethical and unsustainable state of the current fashion market. These conversations are only effective however, if we stay away from the holier than thou rhetoric. Making people feel bad about the clothes they buy and wear is not going to lead to changes in the fashion industry. The best message to convey is to buy whatever you want, but just buy less.
Though people shouldn't be judged or condemned for what they choose to buy and wear, we should all be knowledgeable consumers. Avoiding unethical brands is difficult, and it's often a lost cause to cancel brands with unethical practices and their consumers that support these practices with their dollar. The first step to meaningful systematic change is to acknowledge that the system is broken. The best way to do this is to recognize that the hypocrisy of the fashion industry exists because of the omnipresence of immorality.