Ethical consumption is at an all time
high. Never before in the history of the world have people been so
unaware of how their goods reached them, but also curious to know,
hence ethical consumption. In the past, we would know who had made
our clothes and where the wool had come from. In the more recent
past, we would not have known, but also we would not have cared. Now
we want to know and we want to care.
Fair trade and other forms of ethical
consumption are ever present in today's markets. Once the
preserve of specialist shops, they are stocked by supermarkets
alongside goods made in sweatshops without a hint of irony. The
fact that even Nestle, that old boycotter’s favourite, now sticks
the fair-trade label on some of its confectionary hints that
fair-trade is part of the mainstream. It scratches an itch some
people have about their spending habits. However, there are people
who knowingly consume unethical goods or are aware of a dubious moral
track record of certain brands but continue to purchase them anyway.
Why does this happen? There is a degree
to which unethical consumption is a reaction to pressure to consume
ethically. Some feel a knee jerk reaction to what is perceived as
left-wing pressure, political correctness or interference in their
daily lives. These individuals continue to consume unethically in
order to resist social pressure to consume ethically. This attitude
is selfish and a result of culture which emphasises individual
gratification above collective good. There is a degree to which
advocates of ethical consumption are their own enemies as applying
pressure to change consumer habits can drive people in the opposite
direction. We can see a similar phenomenon with advertising; many
people avoid the Go Compare website simply because their adverts are
so annoying.
Worse than callous disregard for the
suffering that unethical consumption causes are those who believe
that unethical consumption is good for the world’s poor. There are
those who generally believe that sweatshops and exploitative labour
improve the circumstances of people in poorer countries. For some
this is simply a desire to justify their spending habits and a way of
intellectualising rigid brand loyalty. For others it is somewhere
between blind faith that capitalism will solve the world’s problems
or genuine belief in the libertarian free market, a point of view
which can only come from a position of privilege. Just as
capitalism’s greatest defenders are those who have lucked out and
currently sit on top of the heap, unethical consumption is defended
by those who value cheap produce above all else and cannot see beyond
the end of their garden. Only someone who has never stitched T-shirts
continuously for twelve hours for only a few cents could ever suggest
it was a route out of poverty.
Just because someone consumes ethically
does not necessarily remove the impact of their consumption on
others. It’s not that buying a Fairtrade T-shirt or jar of
coffee isn’t preferable to a non-Fairtrade version. It’s just to
say that these consumers aren’t just paying for a product
alone. Ethical consumption is just another level of service.
People who have more than their fair share feel guilty and want to
know what effect their excess income has on the world. Purchasing
Fairtrade products is a way of assuaging this guilt, whilst
essentially maintaining the present system by those it benefits,
albeit whilst also acknowledging its obvious flaws. If you are
rich, you are hardly likely to seriously challenge the economic model
that made you rich. It is however difficult to deny the problems
caused by inequality on a global scale so a certain section of the
wealthy have come up with ethical consumption as a means to relieve
their guilt without having to threaten their position within the
established economic system.
There are those who question the rights
of ethical consumers to have a larger income than average and believe
that this inequality is part and parcel of the system which lead to
ethical consumption differentiating itself from unethical
consumption. In short there will always be unethical products until
we radically reconsider how the market place is constructed. Only
substantial change to every aspect of our economy will remove
unethical products.
Leaving this complex issue up to
anything as simple as consumer choice will never resolve the problems
caused by unethical consumption. Offering ethical alternatives from
the same companies which created the problem in the first place
alongside their unethical counterparts is not a solution and will
never be. If you worried about unethical produce then ethnical
consumption will not resolve the problem. Only radical change to the
economy will suffice. However, in the absence of a strong movement
for radical change, ethical consumption is preferable to ignoring the
problems consumption creates, or choosing to believe that
exploitation will rid capitalism of its contradictions.
No comments:
Post a Comment