What Does "There's No Ethical Consumption Under Capitalism" Truly Mean?
By Kiara Lewis
Photograph by Xyla Abella, featuring @iamcid_
If you have been on social media, especially Tiktok, in the past year, you have probably heard the statement: “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism.” While this is often said in response to someone critiquing an influencer for supporting a brand that uses child labor and sweatshops or even said as a way for an individual to justify their $300 Shein haul, what does this really mean?
Well, the gist is that under capitalism, there will always inherently be harm done; whether this consumption affects workers, consumers, or the environment, it is inevitable that there will be victims due to the cyclical nature of this greedy system. This greed is an incentive to sell the cheapest and quickest made products that more often than not result in pollution and unsafe workplaces.
As a result of capitalism, the blame for environmental damage and worker abuse has been shifted onto the consumer by implying that if you shop fast fashion, you are directly responsible for this abuse. This is not true; a consumer is not the problem for being alive in a deceitful society. It is the responsibility of large corporations to prevent a structure such as this from forming; however, when you live in a corrupt society you cannot trust those in power to do this.
This is why those privileged with time and money should fight to dismantle immoralities such as fast fashion. A part of being privileged comes with the responsibility to protect those who do not have the same opportunities to create change as you do. If you want to create change, do it – don’t simply speak about change as an excuse to shame poor communities. Rich people have been known to gentrify thrift stores by bulk buying inexpensive clothing and upcharge them on Depop, buying copious amounts of fast fashion such as Shein for hauls while simultaneously shaming poor people for shopping at H&M. “No ethical consumption under capitalism” was meant to take the wrongful blame off of poor communities and place it onto the corporations who are truly responsible. This phrase does not mean you should indulge in fast fashion in excess, especially if you have the means to support small businesses and ethical brands.
Poor individuals often have no other choice than to shop at H&M for a $4 shirt and $7 pair of jeans because they do not have the resources to shop for sustainable fashion nor the time to thrift. For privileged communities, “no ethical consumption under capitalism” is not an excuse to not try to make an impact. It is a privilege to challenge those in power and therefore those who cannot, should not be shamed for it.
Instead of submitting to the hopelessness of there being no true moral ways to consume in America, privileged individuals could push for active change such as large corporations putting sustainable and honest practices in place, reduced water usage, reduced amounts of pollution released into the air, water, and land, as well as paying livable wages to workers and providing a safe workplace. Pushing for change can look like boycotting unethical businesses if you have the privilege to shop sustainably, posting on social media about their distressing practices, promoting businesses that have moral policies implemented, and demanding legislation that prevents the abuse of workers and the environment.