Today,
a correspondent who goes by the moniker
“TheBoss” shared with me a link to a documentary called “The
True Cost.” For those who are interested, you can watch it for
free here.
This
documentary explores the “hidden costs” of fast
fashion. The filmmaker, Andrew
Morgan, highlights
the terrible work conditions and pay in garment factories located in
third-world countries such as Bangladesh and Cambodia. The film goes
to list the hardships that these workers face – urban squalor,
polluted environments, deteriorating health conditions, broken
families, etc., and, of course, also focuses on the avarice and
ignorance of shoppers in the developed world, all the while
accompanied by a moody score.
I
have already written an article where I defended the existence of
sweatshops. You can read it here.
However,
I felt that I had to add a bit more for this particular documentary.
Although this documentary lasted for about ninety minutes, one
question that is never asked throughout the whole film is “as
compared to what?”
Image Source |
This
is a very important question. Essentially, this documentary is about
economics and it calls for economic reform. However, it is calling
for sweeping economic reforms but, at the same time, refuses to talk
about economics by ignoring this question.
When
we compare the work conditions and the pay that workers in Bangladesh
receive to those of workers in the developed world, they are,
indeed, awful. There is no doubt about that. However, that comparison
is misleading.
The
real comparison that has to made is those Bangladeshi workers'
current pay and work conditions with these workers' realistic
alternatives in Bangladesh.
What
this documentary gets absolutely right is that their working
conditions are dangerous as evidenced by the collapse
of a factory building in Bangladesh, which resulted in the deaths
of more than a thousand workers. So the question is why do so many of
these workers still choose to endure such harsh conditions and low
pay? After all, no one is forcing them at gunpoint to work in these
factories.
The
fact that they still choose to work in these dangerous sweatshops is
powerful evidence that these workers' alternatives are even worse.
Image Source |
Throughout
the film, various activists, and Mr. Morgan himself, call for changes
to be made in the fashion industry. It demands that workers be
guaranteed a living wage. It demands that consumers in the developed
world change their shopping habits and attitudes about materialism in
order to alleviate the strains that those workers suffer.
Let
us be generous and assume that they succeed in their efforts. Let us
say that those workers are paid a living wage (whatever the hell that
means) and affluent shoppers' demand for clothing
produced in the third world drops significantly. Then what would
become of those workers?
Naturally,
they would be forced to choose to toil at jobs that pay even less and
in conditions that are even dirtier and more dangerous. Case in
point, local NGOs in Bangladesh estimated the
total number of female prostitutes was as many as 100,000 and UNICEF
estimated in 2004 that there were 10,000 underage girls used in
commercial sexual exploitation in the country, but other estimates
placed the figure as high as 29,000.
The
intent of this documentary appears to be shame its viewers into
believing that we are pointlessly destroying the environment and
prolonging the suffering of the poor with our materialism,
over-consumption, and avarice.
Image Source |
As
Milton Friedman used to say, these people are soft of heart, but,
unfortunately, they are also soft in their heads. This documentary
was all emotion and no perspective.
Never
mind that most of the documentary was filmed in countries such as
Bangladesh and Cambodia – countries with poor records of protecting
property rights and encouraging market activities that promote
industry, trade, and economic growth – things that Mr. Morgan seems
to think are harmful.
What
this documentary did not focus on at all are the benefits
that
would not have existed had the global trade that fast fashion helped
to spur did not occur. For example, this documentary did not mention
at all that in
the past eight years, Bangladesh's GDP has doubled and the
same can be said for Cambodia.
This
is how economies develop. Before the Miracle
on the Han River, Koreans, too, lived in conditions that were not
too different from those conditions that we now see in places like
Bangladesh and Cambodia.
Many
people in the developed world take our affluent societies for
granted. Our ancestors had to suffer for our affluence to exist. The
only difference is that we can see Bangladeshis and Cambodians suffer now but we cannot
see the suffering that occurred in our own past.
Mr. Morgan and those other activists in his film may have good intentions. However, it does not change the fact that they all suffer from a debilitating case of economic ignorance; and it is this ignorance that is the true enemy of the poor.
Mr. Morgan and those other activists in his film may have good intentions. However, it does not change the fact that they all suffer from a debilitating case of economic ignorance; and it is this ignorance that is the true enemy of the poor.
Image Source |
However, the point is that all of this may be moot in the not-too distant future because of improvements in technology. According to this article in The Economist, robots that can stitch and sew keep getting better and cheaper. Mr. Morgan might get his wish some day after all. The question is whether he will be happy with the results.
Maybe this could serve as a nice counter point.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32961309?ocid=socialflow_facebook