Comment on Am I financially enabling child labor in 3rd world countries by buying second hand fast fashion?
Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 5 days ago
We have a similar discussion in vegan circles. Where we argue against buying second hand leather, down, and wool. The reason is that the second hand market continues to give value to the exploitation of animals. I.e. It normalizes these products. It keeps those products desirable.
The same argument absolutely applies to child labour. Why would you want to keep those products desirable? Is your image, your way of presenting yourself, really more important than child labour? You really do not have to participate in this, nobody who values you as a human will think less of you. In fact, it’s the morally upstanding way to live.
The responsibility of wearing and using a product doesn’t start and end at the first purchase. It continues and changes over time. Fur coats are now generally frowned upon. And who feels comfortable wearing crocodile leather, or ivory beads. These things are out of fashion, for a reason.
And I understand the ecological argument, that it’s a waste of resources. I really do sympathise with this argument. But in the end it’s just saying no to buying something you never really needed in the first place. It’s never an actual decision. Your life doesn’t depends on a piece of designer clothing, or whatever product. And if it does, none of these arguments matter.
So, no it’s a choice and in the end the ethical choice is the one that’s most closely related to being a human being in this world.
palordrolap@fedia.io 5 days ago
Seems to me that would make the true ethical choice to be to buy it from the second-hand shop and then burn it, robbing anyone else any chance of advertising that fashion.
Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 2 days ago
Well, with that logic the end conclusion is to unalive oneself or everyone else. That would Truly truly rob anyone from advertising harm.
You’re making a slight mistake in your logic. The endgoal isn’t the end of advertising, the goal is to not participate in furthering harm. That word ‘participation’ acknowledges that harm exists. And it doesn’t seek to end it but asks how you live with the fact of it existing.
palordrolap@fedia.io 2 days ago
I'm actually of the opinion that humanity needs to get off this rock as soon as possible. The uncomfortable truth is that fewer humans would in fact help the environment, and none would be even better.
The problem is with how to implement that without it turning into murder.
Hence, we leave.
Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 5 hours ago
I have a big problem with that, namely that that is what Elon Musk wants you to think, it’s what Jeff Bezos wants you to think. And when you’re defending the position of ultra capital, you should at least understand why they truly want this. What they truly want is to keep this system intact, they don’t want change, they don’t want responsibility. Going somewhere else to get what you want, is the colonialist mindset, the white mindset. It’s the idea that you as a person have the right to your lifestyle, that you ‘earned’ it. It’s the way that your consumption is tied up with your identity. That your behavior is only secondary to your consumption. Your self worth is rooted in accumulation.
That’s what they are afraid to give up, and ultimately what you’re parroting. While it’s absolutely not trivial to leave, and systemic change is very much necessary far far far before we, poor people, are remotely close to living among the stars in any form of comfort or luxury. Have set up anything close to the insanly complex international trade and knowledge base, rhat depends on billions of people to function. It’s going to take hundreds if not a thousand years. All the while being completely and utterly depending on this very planet.