At What Cost? The Faults of Fast Fashion
From bell-bottoms to silly-bands, the idea of buying “what's new” to follow along with
trends for social acceptance has been around for decades. On a global scale, trend following and
buying clothes became popularized in the West during the 1950s and 60s because the West was
making the products. As said in the documentary, roughly 95% of clothes that were bought in
America, were made in America in the 1950s. Today, only about 3% of clothing is made in
America, while the other 97% is produced by third-world countries such as Bangladesh and
Pakistan. The major difference between then and now is as simple as the cost of making clothes
has gone down, while the price at the counter has also dropped, which ultimately led to the
industry of Fast Fashion.
The price of relocating goods and services through third-party suppliers for cost
reduction-otherwise known Outsourcing- has made countries that can get away with low wages
and child labor so attractive for brands to do business with. Outsourcing may be beneficial on the
side of consumption, but the real cost on the production side of the industry is devastating. As
the ripples of poor working conditions take its toll on the most vulnerable, and worst paid, the
fashion industry is still making trillions. At its saddest, yet most real form, in the film we see the
reality of Fast Fashion in the 8-story building tragedy that killed hundreds of workers, including
many children, in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Building owners had ignored complaints from the workers
of cracks in the building structure, as well as warnings of evacuation after inspection; literally
“Paying the Price '' of cheap clothing. Sadly, we see stories similar to what happened in Dhaka
time after time in the news. While the profit may be rising, the death toll is too.
No guarantee of human rights for the workers in the most important part of the industry is
sad enough, but Displacement is also another harsh reality of the Fast Fashion industry.
Development induced Displacement is majorly inconvenient, as shown in the film. In the
documentary, we meet a mother and a father in Bangladesh who haven't seen their kids in a year,
because they cannot afford to live in the city where their work is. This is detrimental to the
development of the kids because even though the children are being cared for, no one can care
for you like your parents.
The documentary worked as an argument against globalization by mainly focusing on the
cons in countries where the supply is produced. Seeing the chemicals being poured into rivers
and the harsh conditions shocked me the most because it really shows the effects the sweatshops
have on their environments and not just the workers themselves. What didn't surprise me was the
ignorance of the people disregarding human rights in exchange for their 75% off discount at
stores like H&M. One person in particular said in the documentary that they see nothing
intrinsically dangerous with “sewing clothes' ', even after knowing the abundance of evidence
against sweatshops and cheap labor. Personally, I try to avoid Fast Fashion as much as I can by
buying upcycled clothing, but in some ways it's unavoidable. When it comes to shoes, almost all
brands participate in Fast Fashion which is where I fall flat in helping the problem. Overall, to
solve fast fashion, prices either have to go up, manufacturers will have to shut down, or
companies will continue to cut corners to make things work for their consumers.
References
Lechner, F. J., & Boli, J. (2015). Institutions and Inequality. In The globalization reader (p. 24).
essay, Wiley Blackwell.
LECHNER, F. J., & BOLI, J. (2015). The Moral Challenge. In The globalization reader (p. 31).
essay, Wiley-Blackwell.