Responsibility for Sweatshops Is Local, Not Global

When the tragic fire broke out in a garment factory in Bangladesh several months ago, the latest of several,
I was among a very few (here and here) to argue that blame must be assigned to Bangladesh and not to the brands. Since the factories were locally owned and operated, the blame surely belonged to their owners and managers, not to their clients any more than to those of us who purchased the garments at home or abroad.

The recent tragedy, which is on an astonishingly greater scale, has finally made it clear, except to those who are fixated on the brands as greedy capitalist predators, that it is the Bangladeshi owners and managers who must be held responsible. Primark, among the brands in Bangladesh, has accepted blame: but this is surely in response to misplaced outrage and militantly aggressive nongovernment organizations whose demands tend to outrun their probity.

The brands may therefore be forgiven if, like Disney, they refuse to be scapegoats and look for exit. Reputation is a precious commodity; and brands, like many of us who value our fair names, will guard it with tenacity.

The real tragedy is that as Bangladesh loses more brands, the engine of growth represented by the jobs they created will disappear, leaving the poor poorer than when the brands were around. The answer has to be for Bangladesh to buckle down and fix the acute governance shortfall that is at the heart of the fires and collapsed buildings. Is that too much to ask for?

Join Opinion on Facebook and follow updates on twitter.com/roomfordebate.