Globalisation – Pike & Hurricane

The horror of fast fashion industry in the globalized world

Elena Wasserzier — Tue, 05 Nov 2019 13:04:14 +0000

The “I want it, I got it” mentality

We shop it, we toss it. Only after a couple of years, or in some cases months. But do we, as the consumer, really consider the working conditions under which our acid-washed denims or cosy coats have been produced? How little money can be spent, without any second thoughts, on numerous pieces of clothing in stores like Primark compared to how little money is received on the other end by the seamstresses?

What is fast fashion?

The term “fast fashion” depicts the speed, at which clothing designs are drafted, come into product and are available for purchase in stores worldwide and online. Fast fashion is mainly characterised by huge amounts, low profit margin, fast-paced production and extremely cheap and disposable items.

Globalisation contributes significantly to the rise of the acceleration of fast fashion, because open markets are existing all over the world and industrialisation is on its peak. Furthermore, the consumer is also responsible for the well-known “I just want that, so badly” mentality, following weekly trends which of course give us instant satisfaction but also lead to mass consumption and an unreasonable shopping of items, we do not need. In most cases the clothing is produced cheaply, hence, it does not last long which then again sends us in an infinite spiral of shopping and tossing.

Developing countries as financial remedy?

We have to ask ourselves why our everyday life clothing is produced in developing countries such as Bangladesh, China or Vietnam. It would make so much more sense for huge apparel companies like Zara or Primark to produce the clothes in the countries they sell it to, right?

Many people would like to believe so, but the EU labour law regulates working conditions that are ought to accomplish high employment and social protection, improve the living and working conditions and help to build a healthy work community. Therefore, the payment for seamstresses is way higher and more expensive for fashion companies in European locations.

Here, globalisation comes into play: To avoid having to pay their workers reasonable salaries many fast fashion companies set up their manufacturing business in Bangladesh. Production there is even cheaper than in China, the previous number one for cheap fashion production, because wages in China have started to rise due to the country’s overall increase in wealth. The minimum wage for Chinese garment workers fluctuates between 100-200 USD whereas Bangladesh’s seamstresses may earn as little as 38 USD per month due to the country’s general lack of regulations.

And of course, the low wages it pays its garment workers make it really attractive to fashion companies giving them an opportunity to reduce their costs and make more profit. The minimum wage in the garment sector, remains one of the lowest in the world, even though the government in Bangladesh raised it as a result to the Rana Plaza collapse.

Mass consumerism and its results

The irresponsible cheap prices of fast fashion clothing brands promote mass consumption solely by their price tags. An obvious example would be the clothing store Primark, where people often leave the store with ten or more items in a huge shopping bag, bragging about their yields. And this word-of-mouth recommendations clearly work for Primark.

Often in our society, clothing and “shopping” is considered a hobby without second thoughts regarding the consequences globally, economically or the exploitation of the seamstresses. After all, it is always a question of demand and supply and the more people that fall for “unethical cheap thrills” the more seamstresses suffer under bad conditions and get exploited for an inhumane minimum wage, often not even able to care for their families. “A report by Sabina Dewans Just Jobs network found that the typical wage in Bangladesh was just 14% of a living wage that would provide for the basic needs of a worker“

Labourers life as commodity: the Rana Plaza collapse

The tragedy of the collapse Rana Plaza which was housing five garment factories in Dhaka, Bangladesh that happened in the year 2013. The collapse of the building killed over 1,132 people and injured more than 2,500. As a result of the disaster, the world finally noticed the poor labour conditions of workers in the garment sector in Bangladesh where millions of low-paid people, most of them children and women, are working in an unsafe work environment with a high occurrence of work-related accidents and deaths, as well as diseases caused by toxic chemicals. Most of the factories are not meeting international standards required by building and construction laws. Therefore, deaths from fire incidents and buildings, which are caving in happen on a regular basis. The worker and their labour are considered disposable and convertible, a commodity to reach fast production under cheap salary.

Alternatives

After all these bloodcurdling news we should ask ourselves how we, as consumers, can change these circumstances. Well, after all it is in our hands: Do we want to act based on laissez-faire principles and just continue to mindlessly consume, or do we want to try and alter the conditions for seamstresses and rebel against this exploiting, inhumane system that treats labourers as commodity and only sees the product and not the person behind it?

To be more political and set strong examples one can always use the streets as a form of protest. Demonstrations against working conditions in third world countries are highly common and frequently made use of. Many seamstresses in Bangladesh, their families and families of the deceased used the uproar after the Rana Plaza incident to protest against their working conditions and to express their mourning.

Another method would be to boycott the fast fashion industry and brands like Primark or Zara that produce their disposable items in countries like Bangladesh under inhumane labour conditions. Thrift shopping in second hand stores is a great, and budget-friendly, alternative. This way we will not support the fast fashion industry and its huge money-stacking, capitalist companies.

Slow fashion brands like Reformation try to set a new example with ethical clothing which, however, does come with a price tag. Reformation sets their aims in using eco-friendly materials and reducing its carbon footprint by manufacturing many of its products close to where they are sold. This means the production, manufacturing and designing takes place close to the company’s headquarters in Los Angeles

Along with every item, their website shows how many gallons of water were used to produce it. Additionally, they are working towards paying 100% living wages extensively. About a third of Reformation’s management team are women, people with a disability or minorities.

Another improvement towards conscious clothing and shopping is the German green button, which since 2018 stands for ethical work conditions, fair fashion and better payment. It is also known as the “world’s first government sustainable textile label” drafted by the federal government in Germany and will make it easier for buyers to recognise ethical fashion. The seal is only awarded to vendors that comply with social and economic minimum standards, for instance minimum wage and sufficient health protection. Certified by external institutions, companies have to prove that they align with those standards to obtain the green button for their clothing.

And if one still cannot resist to buy the cute top presented on the mannequin in the next forever 21 store, one should be aware of the true cost of that little piece of polyester and cotton. There should always be a regard towards the buyers consciousness. In the end, it is always a question of demand and supply.

by Elena Wasserzier

Photo credits

Dhaka Savar Building Collapse, Jaber Al Nahian, CC BY-SA 2.0

BANGLADESH-BUILDING, coolloud,CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post The horror of fast fashion industry in the globalized world appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

SWIFT, Sanctions and Human Security

Anna Bernard — Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:18:33 +0000

In March 2012 something unprecedented happened. A country was cut off from SWIFT, the Belgium-based Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. In this case, the disconnecting of Iran was an effort to contain Iran’s disputed nuclear program. The narrative was that Iran’s exclusion would damage its ability to conduct foreign trade and money transfers, since the system is used to transmit payments and letters of credit globally and locally. Belonging to global financial networks opens up an endless amount of opportunities, but once severed from the system, who pays the price?

The severity of the crippling economic pressure imposed on Iran led to the nuclear deal of 2015 where economic sanctions were lifted in return for limitations to the country’s debated nuclear energy programme. The side effects of the sanctions were many, ranging from unemployment and inflation to regime change. The people of Iran, tired of global financial sanctions, elected Hassan Rouhani, a reformist, to follow the populist hardliner Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in an attempt to restore living standards.

SWIFT

SWIFT, with its headquarters in Brussels, operates the largest international money transfer mechanism and is vital to international money flows, exchanging an average 18 million payment messages per day between banks and other types of financial institutions in 210 countries. According to the SWIFT website, it enables the global community to communicate securely and exchange standardised financial messages reliably, thus facilitating global financial flows, and supporting trade and commerce all around the world.

Expelling 25 Iranian banks from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication shut down Iran’s main avenue to doing business with the rest of the world. The effects reverberated not only through Iran’s economic structures, but reflected heavily on the local population.

Why does this matter?

Cutting off a country completely from the international financial system in this day and age has an all-encompassing impact. SWIFT cutting off Iranian banks was the first time the West reached so deep into the global banking system to short-circuit financial mechanisms that a society relies on. It is significant because the aggressive nature of the sanctions regime created a situation where the ends justified the means. Disconnecting all Iranian banks from the SWIFT system blocked critical services related to the wellbeing of the Iranian people. The provision of food and medicine was affected, and noncommercial family remittances were impeded.

But just like water will carve its way through stone to create the Grand Canyon, so will money find its way to flow. In the midst of the most aggressive sanctions, expat-Iranians would travel to visit family members with suitcases full of cash or medical supplies. In such a situation of financial short-circuiting, ordinary commerce will become deeply dependent on the international criminal network in order to function at all. This creates even more insecurity for the most vulnerable in such a situation.

The dire situation on the ground in Iran also led to vocal discontent among the people towards former president Ahmedinejad who eventually had to concede power to his follower Rouhani. One of Rouhani’s main campaign promises was to relieve sanctions and restore living standards. This resonated well with the Iranian population and the reformist Rouhani was elected president with the consent of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, who saw in Rouhani an opportunity to bring to an end the nuclear confrontation with global powers while not destabilising the entire regime already suffering from the sanctions. The election of Rouhani also seemed to delight the West, since highest-level direct contact between the US and Iran was established for the first time since the revolution in 1979.

Global finance and human security

The case of Iran’s severance from SWIFT serves as a reminder of the depth and magnitude of the interconnectedness of the global economy. Economic interaction and interdependence is not something that happens in a hidden strata beyond most of us. It affects us every day in a plethora of ways. This case raises questions of the mechanisms in which national interests and ideologies are enmeshed with global security concerns to justify debilitating measures against a regime.

In this age of interdependency and interaction, what befalls a government or a regime, will first and foremost impact the people on the ground. When foreign remittances stop flowing, when the state economy starts to dwindle, when discontent erupts, the daily lives of people become insecure and eventually unbearable. In Iran’s case, all because of a severed SWIFT connection.

By Anna Bernard

Photo credits:

Teheran, ilee_wu, CC BY-ND 2.0

imam khomeini, seier+seier, CC BY-ND 2.0

Money!, Hans Splinter, CC BY-ND 2.0

The post SWIFT, Sanctions and Human Security appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

From the Silk Road to Paradise Papers: Tax Havens and Economic Inequality

Laura Korte — Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:14:06 +0000

When talks of the wealth gap begin, images of class wars start forming in minds of some. However, other contributors to the wealth gap––globalisation and tax havens––seem to be left out of the debate.

Wealth gap, by definition, refers to the unequal distribution of capital within a population––in other words it is economic inequality. As this inequality is growing, several NGOs and institutes are doing more and more research on the topic. According to The Guardian, “half of world’s wealth [is] now in hands of one percent of population.”

From the Silk Road we have travelled a long way, to the era of opulence and luxury brought to us by modern day globalisation. Globalisation––the flow of capital, cultures and services––has gotten us adjusted to the myriad number of options, but we have now come to see the perhaps unavoidable side effect of globalisation; the global wealth gap. The continuity of its existence is much clearer for those who connect the dots between the wealth gap and its factors. So let us talk about one which tends to not be talked about; the impact of tax havens on economic inequality.

Different Rules in Taxes

The recurring topic of tax havens has surfaced on the front page of many newspapers with titles like ‘Paradise Papers’ and ‘Panama Papers’. Off-shore tax havens with their no-tax or low tax policies appeal to many wealthier individuals and companies as they create more or less lawful migration of capital which in return destabilises the economy. Keep in mind that legality is not the problem here, but rather ethicality.

Tax havens and companies, such as Appleby which helps the super-rich to “hide” their wealth, have been scrutinised for several reasons. Investigative journalists have done their duties and brought up issues such as the connections between individuals who are involved in for instance terrorism, illegal mining, human rights abuses and corruption.

It is believed that on a global level the use of tax havens results in approximately 255 billion US dollars loss in tax money annually. After a quick search you will find multiple research papers and journals talking about how tax havens hold between five and seven trillion US dollars. The 2016 US presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, stated that it is time for the biggest US companies to “pay their fair share of taxes so that our country has the revenue we need to rebuild America.” It does seem like there are different rules for the super-rich and for the rest of us; the financially mortal.

A Gulf in Wealth

Rich individuals and multibillion-dollar companies avoiding taxes in poorer countries, and even wealthy countries like the United States, bereave these countries from providing its citizens with public services.Bad tax schemes in countries also support the existence of economic inequality. According to Tax Justice Network, an example of this is tax competition, where governments try to lower taxes on the rich to keep the tax revenue in their country rather than it ending up in a tax haven, but simultaneously end up increasing the taxes on the poor. This in return, strengthens the economic inequality that already exists in all countries.

Though tax havens may seem like a niche that is exclusively for the exuberantly wealthy, tax havens are not marginal in the context of global economics––they truly have a huge impact on financial instability and politics. We do not tie the knot between the issues of wealth gap and tax havens, it seems as though these two things come hand in hand, ushered into our lives through the miraculous phenomenon called globalisation.

We need to start looking at the problem of economic inequality connected to the system that has been producing the imbalance. So from globalisation to tax havens, and from tax havens to the endless cycle of inequality. But understanding tax havens still continues to be strenuous for the ordinary people. Perhaps the lack of knowledge of these tax havens facilitating the endeavours of the richest stops the ordinary people from unifying in efforts of making a change. Like Ronald Wright once said “socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” But what if we, the bourgeoisie, the working class, the hoi polloi (Ancient Greek: “the many”), finally start rising up against the problem of unethicality and inequality and organise resistance towards this injustice?

Photo credits:

The Shard of glass–sharp like the inequality it reflects.

The wealth of a city built in the midst of inequality.

The post From the Silk Road to Paradise Papers: Tax Havens and Economic Inequality appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Between waters: the dilemma of the Nicaragua Canal

Ida Scharla Løjmand — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:47:24 +0000

On June 14, 2013, the Nicaraguan government passed a law enabling the construction of a big interoceanic canal across the country. In August next year, visions of an interoceanic canal through the Central American country between the Pacific and the Atlantic Ocean might become reality. The hope is that the forthcoming waterway will bring development and prosperity to Nicaragua that is one of the least developed in Latin America, according to the World Bank.

But the canal project does not only catalyse dreams of development. For some people living on the land intended to be used for the canal, the government’s plans constitute a threat to their homes and lifestyle. This is the case for the indigenous Rama people and the afro-descendant Creole people inhabiting Nicaragua’s Caribbean coast.

The red line shows the suggestion for the canal route through Nicaragua. The picture is a reconstruction based on the project plan from HKND Group. Original map by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency

The Rama and Creole people traditionally live of fishing and small-scale agriculture in the jungle and to them their way of living is not only a tradition on the verge of vanishing into oblivion. It is also a way of co-existing with nature without harming one’s environment.

One year ago I visited a number of communities in the Rama and Creole Territory and several of the inhabitants emphasised the land’s importance for their lifestyle.

“Without our land, we are nothing”

According to Hilario McRae, a member of the local government in the Rama community of Indian River, the indigenous people are “nothing without Mother Earth”. He argues for the right of his people to their territory because the Ramas live from the forest.

“The reserve [the Indio-Maíz Reserve located in the Rama territory, ed.] is like a refrigerator to us,” he told me when I interviewed him last year about the arguments for protecting the Ramas’ land. “If we want to eat wild pig, we go hunting. If we want fish, we fish in the river. And without the forest, we will not have water. If you cut down the woods, the river will dry out. What carries the water is the roots of the trees. This is why we will not destroy the forest. This is why we call this Mother Earth – without our land and forests, we are nothing.”

Rama people on the Río Indio (Indian River), a part of their legally granted territory that is now threatened by the canal project. Photo: Ida Scharla Løjmand

And the threat of losing their land and culture to the international development project is not the only problem for the Ramas and Creoles. Civil society organisations, such as Amnesty International and the Nicaraguan NGO Fundación del Río, have criticised the Nicaraguan government for permitting the Chinese company HKND Group to construct the canal without the consent from the peoples who will lose their land to the project.

However, HKND Group states its commitment to sustainable development of the environment and Nicaraguan society in the company’s first CSR report. The corporation also claims to have consulted Ramas and Creoles back in 2014 to inform them about the canal’s impact on their land. According to HKND Group, the participants of these meetings were hopeful to see the canal constructed within short time.

The “century-old dream” of development

The first idea of constructing a waterway through Central America emerged already in the 19th century but as we know today, that route ended up going through Panama.

According to HKND Group, the interoceanic canal project is a “a century-old dream” coming true for Nicaragua. HKND Group also points out that global trends call for the construction of another canal. These are trends like increased global maritime trade, a rising global growth rate powered by new technology and emerging businesses, and shifting global trade patterns with more contribution from new markets in Africa and Latin America.

Moreover, HKND Group does not only consider the project having “profound global significance” but also being a way of bringing about economic growth and social development in Nicaragua and thus obtaining “win-win results”.

Rama house in the Indian River community. Photo: Ida Scharla Løjmand

Clash of interests

But the Rama way of living does not exactly harmonise with HKND Group’s visions about global trade and growth rates. And the case of the Nicaragua Canal reflects the challenge of balancing the interests of local communities with those of the rest of the country – and of the world.

This balance is not always easy to find. On one hand, the Ramas and Creoles and several human rights and environmental organisations are fighting to bring attention to the lack of respect to the indigenous and ethnic peoples’ land rights. On the other, a 2016 poll from the Nicaraguan public opinion research center M&R Consultores show that a majority of the Nicaraguans support the interoceanic canal.

Even inside the Rama and Creole Territory, some voices are protesting against the canal and some are condemning the opponents at the same time. Sometimes to an extent where it is hard to figure out who is arguing for what. Before my first visit in the Rama and Creole Territory last year, I was advised to not talk about the canal project for the sake of my own security.

In January 2016, two press releases from the Rama-Kriol Territorial Government (GTR-K) were issued – two completely different statements from what appeared to be the same messenger. The first states that Nicaraguan state officials tried to pressure the Ramas and Creoles to consent to the construction of the canal in the territory but denied them access to the full text of the supposed agreement. The other press release argues that free, prior and informed consent has been obtained from all nine communities of the Rama and Creole Territory “in accordance with the norms of GTR-K and respecting the traditions and customs of the indigenous Rama people and the afro-descendent Creoles.”

This message – signed and stamped by Hector Thomas McRea, the president of the Territorial Government – states that the previous press release is false and accuses canal opponents for abusing the membership of Territorial Government to publish “unauthorized communications”.

Whether the canal construction will actually begin is yet to be revealed in August next year.

Meanwhile, the dispute between advocates and opponents of the international mega-project will most likely go on. The question is how many voices will be overheard when globalisation arrives with promises of economic development.

By Ida Scharla Løjmand

Photo Credits:

Map: U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, public domain

The post Between waters: the dilemma of the Nicaragua Canal appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Air travel: The Motor of Globalisation

Judith Roos — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:31:13 +0000

Air travel is globalisation. Globalisation is air travel.

However we turn it, fact is, that we want to feel connected. We want to meet people from all over the world. We love to travel and discover new places. Previously we travelled by train, today by planes. Our generation might be more aware than ever of the negative environmental impact of aviation but this seems to not affect the growth in air travel.

As globalisation is increasing, the air transport industry is growing, too. However, the prices we pay for a flight are going in the opposite direction – they decrease and allow more people to fly. What are the reasons for that? What is it that often allows airlines to be the cheapest travel method at least within Europe?

Travelling has become easy

According to Sir Tim Clark, President of the airline Emirates, we influence the travel industry: “The way people travel, their decisions for travelling, the amount of money they’re prepared to pay, new entrants coming to market, long-range single aisles, it’s all changing.”

Nowadays, we can reach almost any destination easily. We desire to be fast in getting from place A to B. Taking a plane is often the simplest way. However, travel time alone does not always determine our decision.

Often the price becomes the determinant in the end. During the years, air travel has become more affordable for a growing number of people, often being cheaper than train tickets.

Advantages for airlines

According to the climate activists website 1010uk.org, airlines profit from some important and influential advantages. One simple reason is the fact that pilots, crew and airport staff work for a shorter amount of time than railway employees when compared to the same travel distance. The railways must be maintained and so must the signals, junctions and trains themselves.

Also the competitive factor makes a difference. While there is often just one train company in a country, customers usually have multiple airlines to choose from. This is why airlines try to compete with each other by having the lowest ticket prices.

Airlines also get support from the government. If an airline is government-owned, an airline can automatically be cheaper. According to a list from the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), especially the cheap airlines are more government shared than others.

Technology has made the buying and selling of tickets easy. They can be accessed online or via phone, further lowering costs. There are no travel agents to pay, nor printing or shipping fees. Furthermore, budget airlines fly to airports with lower landing fees and they use the same type of planes to reduce their maintenance costs.

Flying is more

What we need to keep in mind is that flying is not just a cheap way of travelling. It is first of all a way of connecting two locations. Flying is also saving time, allowing us to allocate resources for other things. It is feeling free, being somewhere where human beings are not typically supposed to be. Flying is feeling secure, trusting the pilot that he will guide us safely to our destination.

It does not surprise me that flying is so popular in a fast living world. However, we should still remember to stop and think. Why not take the time to decide if a cheap and fast flight is really what we need? When going on a holiday is it not the goal to slow down?

By Judith Roos

Photo credits:

Rüdiger Stehn, Altenholz Schleswig-Holstein Germany, CC BY-SA 2.0

oddharmonic, Denver International Airport Colorado United States, CC BY-NC 2.0

bratispixl, 4 Triebwerke, CC BY-NC 2.0

The post Air travel: The Motor of Globalisation appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

It’s fast, it’s cheap, it’s fashion

monta.nitisa — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:28:39 +0000

“Look what I bought, it was such a bargain!” and “I heard that the sales season is starting tomorrow, we must go shopping” are just some harmless phrases that we as a consumer society have gotten used to. The fashion industry might seem mundane especially in today’s world when clothes are so cheap and easily available, but in fact the fashion industry has grown into a 3 trillion dollar industry with a profound impact on environmental sustainability, economic inequality and various other aspects of our everyday lives.

We are constantly reminded about all of this, but we are not really given any options on what we might be able to do about it. Recycle? Turn lights off when leaving the room? I found myself feeling powerless against this issue.

But what if I told you that we actually hold the power? That power is what we wear every day – our clothing. What we are not told about is the fact that the apparel industry has actually become one of the most polluting industries in the world, moreover this is the industry were child labour and forced labour is assembling.

Industry worth trillions

Over the past several decades globalisation has continued at an accelerated speed, trade barriers have softened, enabling major brands to outsource the production in pursuit of cheap materials and even cheaper labour. This is the rise of a system in which fashion is produced at low cost, high volume and incredibly high speed in terms of time taking from design to hitting the shop floor. In other words; this is fast fashion.

How does this cycle work? People find new trendy clothes, they fall in love with the design and buy them at extremely low cost. Then either when the low quality clothing falls apart or there is no longer a use for it (because, hey – it is already out of fashion, right?) it is been thrown away and people go buy more items. According to EPA (The United States Environmental Protection Agency), 13.1 million tons of textile are trashed every year and only 15 percent or 2 million tons are recovered to reuse or recycle.

Aftermath of consumerism

Often, the products are cut in one location, assembled in another and have to cross multiple oceans before they end up in our hands. Your super trendy shirt had a long trip across the world in a container ship, which was fuelled up by fossil fuels. That is an often forgotten aspect of globalisation. Comes to no surprise that it has been estimated that fashion industry itself is responsible for 10 percent of the world’s carbon footprint. But the story does not end here.

The manufacturing processes is where things get distressing. Firstly, each kilogram of cotton (did you know that cotton is the fourth largest pesticide consuming crop?) leaves behind 3.3 kilos of carbon emissions. Thus, it takes 2700 liters of water to make just one cotton shirt and that is enough for one person to drink for 900 days. Secondly, 90 percent of dye houses in the developing world release the dye directly into local freshwater sources, and that eventually infers the industry of apparel as the second greatest polluter of fresh water globally. Finally, polyester, a polluting plastic made from fossil fuels, is now in over half of our clothing and is used four times as much as cotton.

Consumer capitalism

The whole fashion industry connects millions and millions of people all over the world – starting from agriculture and manufacture and ending with retail. It is no secret that today in 2017 we have some of the highest levels of inequality and environmental destruction the world has ever experienced.

As much as global capitalist economy depends on extensive consumption in the well-off countries, it also depends on extensive cheap labour in less developed countries. Therefore, there is no such a thing as individual or personal consumption – your consumption affects us all.

Consumption is a tool for maintaining the global capitalist economy. We must find an approach to continue to work in a globalised world that appreciates our planet and people, which are the fundamentals for growth.

Buy or not to buy?

Wearing the same clothes over and over again does not sound that charming, does it? What to do then?

- Try to take better care of the products that we own already.

- Be adventurous – go on a gem hunting in secondhand shops.

- Choose ethical brands.
- Buy less. It is worth asking yourself a few questions before making the decision. Do you really need the item? Is it good quality and durable? Is it made from sustainable material? Was it made fairly and humanely?

By Christiana Nitiša

Photo Credits:

Venere degli stracci, Morry39, CC BY-SA 4.0

Mannequins, SofiLayla, CC0

Fashion shopping bag, webandi, CC0

The post It’s fast, it’s cheap, it’s fashion appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Beyond Globalisation – becoming a multiplanetary civilisation

Julia Glatthaar — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:11:11 +0000

Life has experienced some quite horrible and horrific times, that led to 5 mass extinctions – events where more than 80 percent of all species died out. Statistically speaking, the next mass extinction will come sooner or later, and let us hope for the latter, but it will hit us at some point.

The future might bring us nuclear war and climate change, maybe we will get hit by an asteroid, just look at what happened to the poor dinosaurs, or eventually we’ll be engulfed by the sun. You get the idea. The chances of humans surviving are very, very slim.

So, with all of this being so closely examined and researched, wouldn’t the most logical consequence be to have a backup plan? Shouldn’t we try to “save” the human being on a “USB-Stick”, in case our “computer” crashes? Some people are actually working on this “backup Earth” by planning future travels to and settlements on Mars.

Space Travel

During the 60’s and the epic race to space, 4 percent of all federal spendings of the US were dedicated to NASA, whereas in the 2000s the budget has shrunk to 0,3 percent.
Projects of putting people on Mars, colonising the Milky Way, seem unthinkable and out of reach. Putting people into space seems to have lost its charm.

But, how is this possible when we live in an era of technological advancement? How is it possible that it seems as if no politicians or countries are making space travel one of their priorities? And how on earth is all of this possible when this generation might be the last one to be able to affect the chances of sustaining life of the human species on Earth?

Elon Musk, SpaceX and the Big F***ing Rocket

Well, there is one person who takes space travel very seriously. His name is Elon Musk. Some of you may hear his name for the very first time, others might have heard of him as a co-founder of PayPal, the founder and CEO of Tesla, and a person involved in many other projects such as the Hyperloop, OpenAI, SolarCity or Neuralink.

I will introduce him to you as the founder of SpaceX, as someone who aims to make this “Earth backup” by putting 1 million people on Mars by 2060. Manned missions would start in 2024.

SpaceX is a company that “designs, manufactures and launches advanced rockets and spacecraft […] to revolutionize space technology, with the ultimate goal of enabling people to live on other planets”.

There have already been major advancements by SpaceX. The company has revolutionised space travel by building a reusable rocket, a rocket that will eventually transport humans to Mars and goes by the name of BFR – the Big F***ing Rocket.

Should we colonise Mars?

And of course there is some criticism out there. Critics might ask why we even should move to Mars and destroy yet another planet? Could you argue that by civilising Mars, humans will care less about environmental problems on Earth?

But keep in mind: Mars is not our second chance to make things right, it is not the new refuge for humankind, once we have made Earth an uninhabitable planet. Mars is simply the easiest option to become multiplanetary. As Musk explained in an interview with National Geographic: “The future of humanity is fundamentally going to bifurcate along one of two directions: Either we’re going to become a multiplanetary species and a spacefaring civilization, or we are going be stuck on one planet until some eventual extinction event.”

I know, that this is an abstract idea. On some days I totally get it; it seems like the most logic thing to do – create a backup of humans so that we can stick around for longer in the event of a mass extinction. On other days I tell myself: “This idea is nuts, Elon Musk must be a crazy person, to think that he can create a colony on Mars. Why start polluting more parts of our Galaxy when we can’t even take care of our own planet?”

Whatever you feel right now, I hope that you have managed to step back and get a glimpse of the big picture concerning our future.

By Julia Glatthaar

Photo Credits:

Rebekka Olshcewski, all rights reseved

Interplanetary Transport System, SpaceX, CC0 1.0

EchoStar XXIII Launch, SpaceX, CC0 1.0

Interplanetary Transport System, SpaceX, CC0 1.0

The post Beyond Globalisation – becoming a multiplanetary civilisation appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.