Predatory capitalists in the fashion industry utilize greenwashing to fool their customers and deceive the public
By Ken Bank
July 5, 2024
Source: Coping with Capitalism
Greenwashing is nothing new, it has been around a long time along with public concerns over climate change and environmental impacts affecting consumer decisions about purchasing products. Consumer education, public advocacy, union organizing, political activism, strict regulation, responsible investing (Economic, Social and Governance — ESG) and non-profit consumer options, are the best and most effective means of dealing with capitalist greenwashing and other means of deceptive advertising and marketing techniques.
For decades Wall Street investors, capitalists and corporate managers have been agonizing over the best way for responding to public outcry about environmental degradation and how consumer products contribute to atmospheric and environmental destruction. However, as consumers and activists are beginning to realize there are means and ways to combat the use of greenwashing to cover up the damage done by unscrupulous business owners and capitalists. Some options include organizing workers for collective bargaining in the fashion industry, especially in underdeveloped countries where workers are underpaid and exploited for their cheap labor.
Other options include demanding more government action from federal and state agencies. Also aware consumers can explore alternatives for traditional fashion retail merchandising from consumer cooperative organizations and other nonprofit groups providing retail fashion alternatives.
There is also greater consumer demand for business practices in the production of goods and services for sale to the public that strictly adhere to standards for responsible Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) goals. Corporate policies that have an impact regarding ESG practices for responsible manufacturing and production must be strictly observed and regulated.
The fashion industry is no exception to efforts by dishonest corporate capitalists to fool consumers into believing that the products they buy from big corporations, especially those who produce and manufacture clothing in sub-developed countries, do not have a negative impact on the environment and climate change. We know from experience and news reports that clothing manufactured in underdeveloped countries, which are nonunion and have fewer rules and regulations regarding environmental protection, are much more likely to hurt the environment and negatively affect climate change than clothing manufactured in countries with stricter laws affecting the environment.
In recent decades fashion marketing has put greater emphasis on higher profit margins derived from mass production, “fast fashion”, and higher volume sales which promote low prices to stimulate higher demand for mass produced cheaper clothing. Since “fast fashion” often leads to detrimental impact on the environment as well as eroding the economic welfare of cheap, exploited labor, corporate capitalists are anxious to disguise the harmful effects of mass output and cheap labor on the environment.
Many fashion companies utilize deceptive advertising techniques to disguise the harm to the environment that comes with consumer demand for cheaper products and greater variety. Since there is no accountability for dishonest claims about fashion’s harmful impact on the environment, corporate capitalists can lie, cheat and otherwise exploit consumer demand for greater adherence to environmental protections.
There are limits as to how far the capitalist fashion industry can go in using “greenwashing” as an effective technique in gaining consumer confidence that no harm will come to the environment if they buy from fashionista capitalists. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has the most responsibility to enforce laws regarding deceptive consumer marketing and advertising claims.
Over the last few years the FTC has done little to effectively regulate the use of greenwashing by fashion manufacturers. Rules regarding deceptive and misleading advertising techniques have not been updated to reflect changes in marketing techniques to more effectively attract consumers who buy products believing there is little or no negative impact to the environment.
Recently, however, the number of complaints to the FTC about greenwashing by clothing manufacturers, the use of clever and deceptive marketing techniques to fool customers that their purchase of fashion merchandise will not harm the environment, has increased significantly. In response the FTC has begun to review and improve the regulatory process in such a way that more effectively limits and even eliminates the use of greenwashing by unscrupulous clothing manufacturers.
Another aspect of the “fast fashion” industry that fashionista capitalists have been hiding by greenwashing is the damage done to the environment and global warming by the use of unscrupulous labor exploitation and practices, especially the prevalence of sweatshops in underdeveloped and even more advanced industrial nations. The environmental damage from sweatshops and an impoverished, exploited labor force has a massive detrimental impact on local economic and natural resources necessary to sustain healthy communities.
The only way to counter the use of greenwashing to cover-up sweatshops and exploitation of cheap labor is emphasis on union organizing and collective bargaining.
In the United States more than a century ago the prevalence of sweatshops in American cities led to numerous outbreaks of environmental degradation as well as severe numbers of sickness and disease among workers and their families, especially tuberculosis. With unscrupulous owners of garment factories and the exploitation of cheap immigrant labor, there seemed to be no end of detriment to the environment from the manufacture of textiles and related clothing products.
As sweatshops became more prevalent and the hardship for workers in the garment industry were intolerable, the movement to organize workers started early in the last century. Organizations like the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America and the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, led by labor leaders like Sidney Hillman and David Dubinsky, began to organize workers into unions that would protect the right to bargain collectively with employers and ensure effective protections to prevent abuse and exploitation of their employees.
As working conditions and environmental effects of the clothing manufacturing industry in America improved, capitalist owners of big corporations which dominated the fashion marketplace in America, seeking to maximize their profits and returns to investors, began to set their sights on underdeveloped countries with cheap labor and little or no environmental regulation.
These corporate capitalists saw the advantage of exploiting lax regulations and little or no groups to protect employees welfare, health and safety. As a result these owners expanded their manufacturing operations in those countries at the expense of factory production in the US. That is why capitalists resort to greenwashing to cover-up the damage their manufacturing operations in underdeveloped countries does to the environment, especially the impact on climate change.
In addition to supporting union membership and collective bargaining rights in America, environmental activists as well as labor advocates must support the same for workers in underdeveloped countries. The struggle for environmental protection is an international effort, and must support labor rights and protection in those countries where workers were most vulnerable to exploitation at the hands of their capitalist employers.
UNITE HERE is one such union that has taken the lead for social and economic justice in the fashion industry. They are the successor union to the Amalgamated Clothing Workers and the Ladies Garment Workers, which had merged years ago and then were absorbed years ago into UNITE HERE, which aggressively continues the fight for collective bargaining rights and protection for workers in fashion and other industries.
On the political front, activists concerned about the use of greenwashing by capitalist manufacturers and retailers must prevail upon the FTC to do a better job of removing deceptive marketing techniques and advertising from the marketplace. This also entails political pressure on Congress to provide greater support and regulatory powers for the FTC to regulate the marketplace and make sure clothing manufacturers, especially fast fashion capitalists, do not bend the truth and cover-up their lies about the real damage they are doing to the environment and climate change.
Finally, all of us concerned about the environment and climate change must do our part to boycott clothing manufacturers and retailers who do not subscribe to the strictest standards for policies that promote corporate responsibility, especially adherence to ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) standards for production and services sold to the public. There are options and alternatives to support and patronize companies and businesses that are not profit-driven.
One such company is Patagonia, a manufacturer and retailer of outdoor clothing and equipment. Patagonia is a privately-held multi-billion dollar company whose owner decided a few years ago to donate all of his shares to a charitable trust with all profits to be used for donations to groups and organizations for the purpose of supporting environmental protection and limit the damage from climate change. As the owner once said when he set up the Patagonia Foundation, “The Earth Is Now Our Only Shareholder”.
Retail cooperatives are another option available to shareholders concerned about the environment and climate change. One such company is REI, a membership owned consumer cooperative specializing in outdoor equipment and clothing. Like many other consumer and member-driven cooperatives, REI is not for profit as well as very pro-active in supporting and subsidizing action and policies that respect the environment.
Ultimately, it is up to consumers, activists and other concerned citizens to do their part in combating corporate use of greenwashing. Information is the best way to expose deceit and lies perpetrated by corporate capitalists.
Supporting unions and collective bargaining, political pressure on politicians to support anti-greenwashing efforts by the FTC, supporting investing in those companies that adhere to ESG standards for corporate conduct, and patronizing non-profit retailers/manufacturers are all options to oppose greenwashing.
Ultimately we all have to do our part to spread the word to others about the dangers of greenwashing, and the need to promote political and consumer-driven action to stop the threat posed by capitalist greed to the environment.
Ken Bank is a semi-retired business executive, part-time playwright, and freelance writer with masters degrees in business and history. He lives in New Jersey and is active in the local Democratic Party organization in support of progressive policies.
Greenwashing is nothing new, it has been around a long time along with public concerns over climate change and environmental impacts affecting consumer decisions about purchasing products. Consumer education, public advocacy, union organizing, political activism, strict regulation, responsible investing (Economic, Social and Governance — ESG) and non-profit consumer options, are the best and most effective means of dealing with capitalist greenwashing and other means of deceptive advertising and marketing techniques.
For decades Wall Street investors, capitalists and corporate managers have been agonizing over the best way for responding to public outcry about environmental degradation and how consumer products contribute to atmospheric and environmental destruction. However, as consumers and activists are beginning to realize there are means and ways to combat the use of greenwashing to cover up the damage done by unscrupulous business owners and capitalists. Some options include organizing workers for collective bargaining in the fashion industry, especially in underdeveloped countries where workers are underpaid and exploited for their cheap labor.
Other options include demanding more government action from federal and state agencies. Also aware consumers can explore alternatives for traditional fashion retail merchandising from consumer cooperative organizations and other nonprofit groups providing retail fashion alternatives.
There is also greater consumer demand for business practices in the production of goods and services for sale to the public that strictly adhere to standards for responsible Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) goals. Corporate policies that have an impact regarding ESG practices for responsible manufacturing and production must be strictly observed and regulated.
The fashion industry is no exception to efforts by dishonest corporate capitalists to fool consumers into believing that the products they buy from big corporations, especially those who produce and manufacture clothing in sub-developed countries, do not have a negative impact on the environment and climate change. We know from experience and news reports that clothing manufactured in underdeveloped countries, which are nonunion and have fewer rules and regulations regarding environmental protection, are much more likely to hurt the environment and negatively affect climate change than clothing manufactured in countries with stricter laws affecting the environment.
In recent decades fashion marketing has put greater emphasis on higher profit margins derived from mass production, “fast fashion”, and higher volume sales which promote low prices to stimulate higher demand for mass produced cheaper clothing. Since “fast fashion” often leads to detrimental impact on the environment as well as eroding the economic welfare of cheap, exploited labor, corporate capitalists are anxious to disguise the harmful effects of mass output and cheap labor on the environment.
Many fashion companies utilize deceptive advertising techniques to disguise the harm to the environment that comes with consumer demand for cheaper products and greater variety. Since there is no accountability for dishonest claims about fashion’s harmful impact on the environment, corporate capitalists can lie, cheat and otherwise exploit consumer demand for greater adherence to environmental protections.
There are limits as to how far the capitalist fashion industry can go in using “greenwashing” as an effective technique in gaining consumer confidence that no harm will come to the environment if they buy from fashionista capitalists. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has the most responsibility to enforce laws regarding deceptive consumer marketing and advertising claims.
Over the last few years the FTC has done little to effectively regulate the use of greenwashing by fashion manufacturers. Rules regarding deceptive and misleading advertising techniques have not been updated to reflect changes in marketing techniques to more effectively attract consumers who buy products believing there is little or no negative impact to the environment.
Recently, however, the number of complaints to the FTC about greenwashing by clothing manufacturers, the use of clever and deceptive marketing techniques to fool customers that their purchase of fashion merchandise will not harm the environment, has increased significantly. In response the FTC has begun to review and improve the regulatory process in such a way that more effectively limits and even eliminates the use of greenwashing by unscrupulous clothing manufacturers.
Another aspect of the “fast fashion” industry that fashionista capitalists have been hiding by greenwashing is the damage done to the environment and global warming by the use of unscrupulous labor exploitation and practices, especially the prevalence of sweatshops in underdeveloped and even more advanced industrial nations. The environmental damage from sweatshops and an impoverished, exploited labor force has a massive detrimental impact on local economic and natural resources necessary to sustain healthy communities.
The only way to counter the use of greenwashing to cover-up sweatshops and exploitation of cheap labor is emphasis on union organizing and collective bargaining.
In the United States more than a century ago the prevalence of sweatshops in American cities led to numerous outbreaks of environmental degradation as well as severe numbers of sickness and disease among workers and their families, especially tuberculosis. With unscrupulous owners of garment factories and the exploitation of cheap immigrant labor, there seemed to be no end of detriment to the environment from the manufacture of textiles and related clothing products.
As sweatshops became more prevalent and the hardship for workers in the garment industry were intolerable, the movement to organize workers started early in the last century. Organizations like the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America and the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, led by labor leaders like Sidney Hillman and David Dubinsky, began to organize workers into unions that would protect the right to bargain collectively with employers and ensure effective protections to prevent abuse and exploitation of their employees.
As working conditions and environmental effects of the clothing manufacturing industry in America improved, capitalist owners of big corporations which dominated the fashion marketplace in America, seeking to maximize their profits and returns to investors, began to set their sights on underdeveloped countries with cheap labor and little or no environmental regulation.
These corporate capitalists saw the advantage of exploiting lax regulations and little or no groups to protect employees welfare, health and safety. As a result these owners expanded their manufacturing operations in those countries at the expense of factory production in the US. That is why capitalists resort to greenwashing to cover-up the damage their manufacturing operations in underdeveloped countries does to the environment, especially the impact on climate change.
In addition to supporting union membership and collective bargaining rights in America, environmental activists as well as labor advocates must support the same for workers in underdeveloped countries. The struggle for environmental protection is an international effort, and must support labor rights and protection in those countries where workers were most vulnerable to exploitation at the hands of their capitalist employers.
UNITE HERE is one such union that has taken the lead for social and economic justice in the fashion industry. They are the successor union to the Amalgamated Clothing Workers and the Ladies Garment Workers, which had merged years ago and then were absorbed years ago into UNITE HERE, which aggressively continues the fight for collective bargaining rights and protection for workers in fashion and other industries.
On the political front, activists concerned about the use of greenwashing by capitalist manufacturers and retailers must prevail upon the FTC to do a better job of removing deceptive marketing techniques and advertising from the marketplace. This also entails political pressure on Congress to provide greater support and regulatory powers for the FTC to regulate the marketplace and make sure clothing manufacturers, especially fast fashion capitalists, do not bend the truth and cover-up their lies about the real damage they are doing to the environment and climate change.
Finally, all of us concerned about the environment and climate change must do our part to boycott clothing manufacturers and retailers who do not subscribe to the strictest standards for policies that promote corporate responsibility, especially adherence to ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) standards for production and services sold to the public. There are options and alternatives to support and patronize companies and businesses that are not profit-driven.
One such company is Patagonia, a manufacturer and retailer of outdoor clothing and equipment. Patagonia is a privately-held multi-billion dollar company whose owner decided a few years ago to donate all of his shares to a charitable trust with all profits to be used for donations to groups and organizations for the purpose of supporting environmental protection and limit the damage from climate change. As the owner once said when he set up the Patagonia Foundation, “The Earth Is Now Our Only Shareholder”.
Retail cooperatives are another option available to shareholders concerned about the environment and climate change. One such company is REI, a membership owned consumer cooperative specializing in outdoor equipment and clothing. Like many other consumer and member-driven cooperatives, REI is not for profit as well as very pro-active in supporting and subsidizing action and policies that respect the environment.
Ultimately, it is up to consumers, activists and other concerned citizens to do their part in combating corporate use of greenwashing. Information is the best way to expose deceit and lies perpetrated by corporate capitalists.
Supporting unions and collective bargaining, political pressure on politicians to support anti-greenwashing efforts by the FTC, supporting investing in those companies that adhere to ESG standards for corporate conduct, and patronizing non-profit retailers/manufacturers are all options to oppose greenwashing.
Ultimately we all have to do our part to spread the word to others about the dangers of greenwashing, and the need to promote political and consumer-driven action to stop the threat posed by capitalist greed to the environment.
Ken Bank is a semi-retired business executive, part-time playwright, and freelance writer with masters degrees in business and history. He lives in New Jersey and is active in the local Democratic Party organization in support of progressive policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment