Regarding the progression of the fashion industry, capitalism has caused a ripple effect both socially and economically.
The system promotes fast fashion by being a free market. Free markets are optimal in theory, however they are subject to manipulation and misinformation. The terms that fast fashion brands claim such as “ethical” or “environment/eco-friendly” have no legal relevancy.
For instance, H&M breaks codes of ethics according to the AMA (American Marketing Association) and the Canadian Marketing Association (CMA). The company has shown it is not capable of complete truthfulness and has been inconsistent with the marketing ethics regarding accuracy of representation. Here are just a few examples of how H&M has been misrepresenting itself:
A 2010 lab analysis uncovered the fact that about 30% of H&M’s certified organic cotton clothing line was cross-contaminated with GM cotton. The false advertising of clothing line’s sustainability went against marketing laws from the Norwegian Consumer Authority (CA)
In 2013, they became the first global fashion retailer to launch a garment collecting program in all of its stores. It is true that they launched this program which was created to donate unwanted clothes in recycling bins for the company to reuse to create new garments. What the company did not disclose was just how much of the donations were made into recycled material. In reality, according to environmentalist Elizabeth Cline, less than 1% of the clothes were likely to be made into new garments while the majority would still end up in landfills.
This company alongside others such as Forever 21, Shein, Urban Outfitters, etc, all have set models of production built to efficiently produce as much as possible for as much profit as possible. An article from ama.org on July 19th, 2019, states the following - “Fast fashion is rooted in consumption; it is about generating interest, excitement and serving the need for newness amongst fashion consumers keen to adopt new trends or simply ‘consume’ something new (Barnes & Lea-Greenwood, 2010)”
They do the most minimal public stunts to dodge their part in the environment and the implementations they claim to have for benefiting sustainability are often vaguely stated because real change in these practices would require a complete reformation of their business models and methods of production, which would lose them money. Under Capitalism, the only way these companies can succeed is to comply with the system's demand, and the result of these companies responding to their economic climate is what we know as green washing.
The ripple effect of capitalism's high demand goes through the great oceans and leaks into developing countries as mass production through cheaper labor in large textile mills started becoming sought after in the mid 1970s. The Globalization of these fashion brands is not only damaging the natural environment, but it is also creating chaos in the social environments of developing countries.
The Rana Plaza incident is a prime example of a catastrophic failure that the clothing brands are to blame for. In 2013, the building collapsed in Dhaka, Bangladesh, killing 1,129 workers. The garment workers had told their managers they saw cracks in the building, but they were advised to disregard it and continue working. The managers even ignored an evacuation order that was later given. It is almost comical how direct the connection to greed and corruption was to this disaster, and it speaks volumes to what's to come on the global scale. The managers disregarded reports of danger in their environment in order to achieve a short term gain. Ultimately, none of that short term gain mattered soon after.
There is a domino effect that these fashion brands and other types of businesses create, thus the current conversation of sustainability and climate change. If we don't look at the longevity of our current practices, the short term gain that capitalism provides will inevitably come crashing down.
Further Readings/Research
Comments