Supporting ‘clean clothes’ campaigns to end the extreme exploitation that pervades the textile industry is not as simple as just picking the ‘right’ brand to buy, reveals Mark Engler.

When confronted with the reality that so many of our garments are produced under abysmal working conditions, the first question on many consumers’ lips is: ‘Where can I buy clothes that weren’t made in sweatshops?’ The question is far trickier than it might at first appear. While undoubtedly reflecting an admirable desire among shoppers to be part of the solution to a vexing issue, it comes with problems of its own – and is at the root of a major divide between activists. Many ‘fair trade’ entrepreneurs want to answer consumers by providing a list of alternative, ethically produced products. Yet long-time anti-sweatshop campaigners not only feel sceptical about whether clothing clean enough to deserve the ’no sweat‘ label actually exists, they also wonder whether shopping for the right brand can be enough to create change. ‘I tell people that’s the wrong question to ask me,’ says Martin Hearson, Campaign Co-ordinator for the British anti-sweatshop organization Labour Behind the Label. ‘Given that the problems are structural and apply across the board, we need to engage the industry as a whole. The right question for people to ask is: “How can I persuade companies to do more to improve the conditions of workers on the ground?” It’s not just about the particular pair of trousers that you buy.’ ‘If we look only at voting with your dollars as the solution, it’s a pretty easy answer for people – one that can actually result in more passivity,’ adds Bob Jeffcott of the Toronto-based Maquila Solidarity Network. ‘If I can buy clothing that has some sort of label on it that says it’s made under decent conditions, then I can feel good about myself and I don’t have to do anything else. Well, we’re hoping that people will go beyond shopping.’

Targeting the corporate giants In the past decade the anti-sweatshop movement has been successful at raising awareness about exploitative working conditions in the garment industry. In the process, it has uncovered some uncomfortable truths about our global economy. Early on, in the 1990s, the movement captivated consumers with high-profile campaigns exposing the abuse of workers, usually in the Global South, who produced goods for corporations like Nike, Levi’s and Gap. In truth, major brands were targeted not because their practices were dramatically worse than their off-brand competitors (who often used the very same suppliers). Rather, activists ran campaigns against corporate giants because the companies carefully guarded their brand images and were therefore susceptible to media exposés. To a great extent, the strategy worked: major players in the apparel industry, who for years denied exploitative conditions, have since been compelled

14 NEW INTERNATIONALIST NOVEMBER 2006

An Indian man dyes cotton in Tirupur. The challenge for campaigners is how to end exploitation at every stage of the garment supply chain.

S

E

R

U

T

C

I

P

LL

I

T

S

/

NG

I

L

H

T

E

O

B

G

R

E

O

Sweating over sweatshops J