In the eighteenth century what dictated how people lived and interacted with one another was their place in society, both economically and socially, and this was greatly dependent on what they wore. Starting at about the mid 1800's, fashion and clothing were not the primary ways to define oneself. People's identity and role in life were mainly based on their personal beliefs. For men, clothing was not of any significance and certainly didn't occupy their minds or passions.

This changed in the 1900's when fashion and a person's body image become the dictating factor for identifying oneself in life and it ruled where someone stood in society. The 20th century maintained this momentum, perhaps up until the 1960's when the hippie movement of free love, peace and equality lead people to rebel against the personal confines of fashion and social trends and move towards a more simplistic, selfless perspective. In the late 1980' s to the early 1990's and up until today, people are once again becoming less interested in fitting a specific social category where one is judged according to what he/she wears and becoming more interested in the world around them similar to the 19th century.

There has been an uprising in the fair trade and ethical buying of clothes amongst the general population and an increasing interest to seek justice and peace within the past 20 years that has led people to appropriate their ideas of social justice into the world of fashion, and focus more on their personal beliefs, their works and how they affect their environments as a means to identifying themselves.

Moving onto the 1900's, this eighteenth century idea that what you wore was an expression of the type of person you were became an accepted truth and led people to identify themselves and judge others according to how they dressed. Joan Jacobs Brumberg says in her book The Body Projects "At the end of the twentieth century, the body is regarded as something to be managed and maintained." People were loosing interest in their "internal character" and becoming obsessed with their "outward" appearance and self-centered lives. The women's suffrage movement of the 1920's and 1930's, the media revolution of the 1970's, and the current technological advances in medicine are some examples of movements that have influenced people's interest with themselves and fashion. The hippie movement of the 1960's was a breathe of fresh air to the materialistic machine that the western world was becoming. What the "hippies" brought to our attention was the need for community and the need for the universal care for one another.

Centered on developing a more peaceful and selfless society, the hippie movement deemphasized the importance of fashion and other social trends that caused divisions in class within society and the world. A similar train of thought was carried into the late 1980's and 1990's where people were once again losing interest in fitting a specific social category where one is judged according to how they dressed and becoming more interested in things like global social/economic justice, and peace. This new "social consciousness" of the West, specifically in the United States, brought about the Fair Trade and Ethical Buying movement of our day. What began as a small reaction to the over consumptive West by various underground organizations and the Christian church is now being appropriated into mainstream fashion trends and even into the high-end fashion industry.

Fair Trade, as defined by the Fair Trade Federation, means an equitable and fair partnership between marketers in North America and producers in Asia, Africa, Latin America and other parts of the world. A fair trade partnership works to provide low- income artisans and farmers with a living wage for their work, enabling them to cover basic needs, including food, shelter, education and health care for their families. Ethical Buying simply means the consumer is making an ethical decision when he/she purchases an item such as food, clothing, furniture, etc. It is the consumers' responsibility to ensure that the item was produced and traded fairly so as to condemn human rights abuses. According to Daniel Jaffee, assistant professor of sociology, Michigan State University, of the Chronicle Review, "the Fair Trade movement emerged in the mid 1980's out of the inequities of the international trade system. It was sparked by concern over the fact that a miniscule portion of the purchase price of tropical products like coffee was reaching the people who farmed in the first place." Third party certifiers who label products that meet Fair Trade standards such as guaranteed minimum pricing, environmentally sustainable production practices, and safe, non-exploitative working conditions regulate the Fair Trade system.

There have been many reports describing the awful realities of the unethical treatment of workers by numerous popular corporations and businesses like Wal-Mart, Adidas, Gap and Nike. Don Wells comments in his article "Global Sweatshops and Ethical Buying Codes" that over the last 20 years, or so, transnational corporations (TNC's) have been taking advantage of lower trade barriers and falling transportation and communications costs in order to relocate production to poor countries in the global south. Children are unfortunately common workers for many TNC's. "Recently a manufacturer of McDonald's Happy Meal toys was charged with employing 13 year olds, working 16 hours per day, for three dollars" (Wells). Other TNC's source from factories where there is forced labour, the firing, beating, blacklisting, torture and killings of unionists, physical, psychological and sexual abuse of workers, discrimination against women, and exposure to dangerous, unhealthy work. Don Wells also mentions that in Thailand, workers producing children's clothing for Nike, Levi Strauss and Adidas recently reported having to work up to 110 hours per week. Managers made them swallow amphetamines ("speed") so they could work up to 48 hours straight before collapsing. In other cases, there are reports of workers injected with contraceptive drugs and employers pressuring pregnant workers to have abortions. The worst problem, however, for most workers is that their wages don't meet basic needs. In China, Vietnam, Indonesia and other countries base wages range from 20 to 30 cents a day. These very reports of human rights abuses are what influenced the rise of the fair trade and ethical buying of clothes amongst the general population, and led people to appropriate their ideas of social justice into the world of fashion.

Three specific Transnational Corporations that have fallen under the temptation of sweatshop labour and cheap transportation/communication costs are Levi Strauss, Nike and Gap Inc. According to the article "Human Rights: Ethical Shopping" from The Economist, in 1992, "Levi Strauss was discovered buying clothes from factories in Saipan, a small island 7, 000 miles from the California coast, but still part of the United States. The jeans maker's local workers were underpaid, living in padlocked.

barracks and working in appalling conditions in contravention of American law." Immediately after these discoveries were brought to the publics' attention, Levi's introduced new terms of engagement for business partners, making sure not to utilize child labour. One of its biggest moves was to severe links with China. According to William Beaver in his article "Levi's is Leaving China" of the Business Horizons, "The company decided to end much of its business dealings in China because of what the company called pervasive human rights abuses." Surprisingly, Levi's involvement in China was not large. They purchased from 30 different Chinese subcontractors who produced trousers and shirts, amounting to about $50 million per year.

Inspecting subcontractors operations is a good place to start. Following that, companies can work closely with subcontractors to improve the situation. As one Levi's vice president put it, "Increasingly, consumers are sensitive to goods being made under conditions not consistent with U.S. values and fairness" (Beaver 37). Levi's China experience also raises larger ethical questions; specifically, how should U.S. firms conduct themselves in China and other third world countries?

In 1964, Philip Knight and Bill Bowerman founded Blue Ribbon Sports with the idea to import athletic shoes from Japan to compete in the German-controlled market. In 1972, the company changed its name to Nike. Nike is currently the largest manufacturer of athletic supplies in the world (DeTienne 2005). In June of 1996, Bob Herbert, a New York Times columnist, criticized Nike labour conditions within a harsh open ended piece. The accusations alleged that Nike built its wealth and products with the "slave" labour of young Asian women. The accounts described human rights abuses, violence to labourers, and hideous working conditions within Nike's Asian facilities. Over 40 demonstrations occurred at nationwide Niketowns, resulting in the arrests of 19 demonstrators. Nike's image was stained and it was pressured to respond (DeTienne 2005).

Nikes immediate response was to create a PR campaign claiming that its factory conditions were equitable and its labourers were fairly treated. "When companies' behavioral actions contradict their statements of intent, a type of hypocrisy exists for the inconsistent company" (DeTienne 2005). The company was sued in April of 1998 for its false advertisement. Nike battled the premise of the case, arguing that the truthfulness of the statements is immaterial because, as free speech, they were protected by the First Amendment, however advertisement falls under commercial speech so Nike lost the case under the California Supreme Court. Nike appealed the court ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court but was turned down on June 23, 2003. Not only did Nike lose millions of dollars, but they helped set a standard for other Fortune 500 companies to adhere to. Businesses, especially large ones like Nike, now have to be truthful in their advertisements and beware of third party organizations that are constantly researching companies' labour records. As more companies enter the multinational arena, and the public becomes more aware of social and environmental conditions in developing countries, the need for sufficient, transparent disclosure of corporate conduct will continually increase.

It is to no surprise that Gap Inc. was once again discovered using child labour to produce their clothing. Dan McDougall of the British newspaper The Observer, published his investigation of the popular TNC: Gap Inc. in October of 2007. His investigation revealed children between the ages of 10 and 13 hand stitching Gap garments for no pay, and living under horrid conditions. The children were bought from their parents and transported by train to underground factories in New Delhi, India, where the children work from dawn to am hours non-stop with no salary. Not only are the children deprived of education, healthcare, and proper nurturing, but they are now also slaves to the over consumptive West. With annual revenues of more than $8 Billion and endorsements from Madonna and Sarah Jessica Parker, Gap has arguably become the most successful brand in high-street fashion. Gap has huge contracts in India, which boasts one of the world's fastest-growing economies.

But over the past decade, India has also become the world capital for child labour. According to the UN, child labour contributes an estimated 20 per cent of India's gross national product with 55 million children ages 5 to 14 employed as factory workers.

"Gap may be one of the best-known fashion brands with a public commitment to social responsibility, but the employment of bonded child slaves as young as 10 in India's illegal sweatshops tells a different story," says Bhuwan Ribhu, a Delhi lawyer and activist for the Global March Against Child Labour. "The reality is that most major retail firms are in the same game, cutting costs and not considering the consequences. They should know by now what outsourcing to India means". Although Gap continues to be at the forefront of high end street fashion, it is no longer a first choice for those seeking justice in fashion. As the allegations against companies like Gap (which also controls Old Navy and Banana Republic) continue to arise, the younger generations will continue to rebel and demand fair trade from the mainstream world of fashion.

Part of the growing Fair Trade and Ethical Buying trend within the mainstream fashion is this idea of wearing "visible products that let consumers communicate to others the type of person they are" (Tedeschi 2006). "Cause-marketing", a strategy that associates the purchasing of a product with fundraising for charitable initiatives or causes reached its eventual summit through U2's front-man Bono.

Together with Gap (ironically enough), Giorgio Armani, Apple, Motorola, American Express, Converse and Bobby Shriver of Debt AIDS Trade in Africa (DATA) introduced the world to "product (RED)". The effort aims to advance opportunities for the people of Africa, and to promote HIV/AIDS workplace policies and practices (Krishna 2007). Companies seem to be cashing in on peoples desire to look good while doing good. "Activism is the new chic," writes Newsweek's Jessica Bennett, "and we, the consumers, have become the new activists-saving the world one credit-card transaction at a time." Product (RED) has raised about $20 million for the Geneva-based aid organization: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria.

While cause marketing and "socially-conscious" fashion seek to provide message oriented clothing for the general public, to raise awareness and fundraise humanitarian projects, "ethical" fashion simply consists of garments produced/sold fairly.

The production of ethical clothing is more about the workers and the countries that make the products than the buyers or consumers. Sri Lanka is one of the leaders in this growing trend. This third world country often faces criticism about its dismal human rights record, but its main exports-tea and garments-are gaining global recognition as goods produced under excellent environments that protect workers' rights. The country's garment factories, which were once similar to sweatshops in Hong Kong and China, have transformed. Some have even installed automatic cash machines and provided accommodations for workers (Samath 2007). The industry label and PR campaign: "Made in Sri Lanka: Garments without Guilt", is aimed at differentiating Sri Lanka from mounting competition from China and India by producing clothes the ethical way. Products such as "ethical teas" and "ethical bras", which market not only the products but also the labour conditions under which they were produced, have gained significant consumer loyalty in the U.S. and European markets.

The U.S. has also turned out some successful fair-trade apparel brands such as Fair Indigo and American Apparel. Fair Indigo: Style with a Conscience hires directly from cooperatives which eliminates the middle man and helps to ensure the quality of their products. According to a survey solicited by the company, 86% of consumers care about whether their clothing is made by workers who are paid fairly and treated with respect (Mustafa 2007). According to a survey done by Opinion Research for LRN-which consults on business ethics and governance, nearly 75% of shoppers said they would prefer to buy stuff from a company with ethical practices even if it meant paying more (Tedeschi 2006).

Ethical buying codes can be an important way to improve working conditions. In the U.S. the anti-sweat movement is probably the largest student mobilization since Vietnam. Some 200 U.S. colleges and universities have adopted "no-sweat" buying policies. The recent campaign at the Kukdong plant in Mexico is important evidence supporting the need for fair trade and ethical buying. At the factory, supervisors intimidated and verbally and physically abused the young indigenous women and children workers. They refused to give pregnant workers legal maternity leave and sick-leave benefits, and wages were below the legal minimum. When the workers tried to form an independent union, the managers fired them. When the Worker Rights Consortium and other anti-sweat groups heard about this, they organized a solidarity campaign that included participation from people in 17 countries. The campaign along with the workers' determination resulted in an independent union - the first in Mexico's 3,500 maquiladoras (plants that assemble for export). Ethical purchasing codes politicize students, faith-based groups and a new generation of consumers, and influence people to question where their clothing is coming from and whether it's being traded fairly.

The U.S. has also turned out some successful fair-trade apparel brands such as Fair Indigo and American Apparel. Fair Indigo: Style with a Conscience hires directly from cooperatives which eliminates the middle man and helps to ensure the quality of their products. According to a survey solicited by the company, 86% of consumers care about whether their clothing is made by workers who are paid fairly and treated with respect (Mustafa 2007). According to a survey done by Opinion Research for LRN-which consults on business ethics and governance, nearly 75% of shoppers said they would prefer to buy stuff from a company with ethical practices even if it meant paying more (Tedeschi 2006).

Ethical buying codes can be an important way to improve working conditions. In the U.S. the anti-sweat movement is probably the largest student mobilization since Vietnam. Some 200 U.S. colleges and universities have adopted "no-sweat" buying policies. The recent campaign at the Kukdong plant in Mexico is important evidence supporting the need for fair trade and ethical buying. At the factory, supervisors intimidated and verbally and physically abused the young indigenous women and children workers. They refused to give pregnant workers legal maternity leave and sick-leave benefits, and wages were below the legal minimum. When the workers tried to form an independent union, the managers fired them. When the Worker Rights Consortium and other anti-sweat groups heard about this, they organized a solidarity campaign that included participation from people in 17 countries. The campaign along with the workers' determination resulted in an independent union - the first in Mexico's 3,500 maquiladoras (plants that assemble for export). Ethical purchasing codes politicize students, faith-based groups and a new generation of consumers, and influence people to question where their clothing is coming from and whether it's being traded fairly.