Too Much Choice, Not Enough Money

A Frustrating Contradiction

We are presented with many choices, but having a choice doesn't necessarily mean having the opportunity to make the ethical one.

If someone has carefully budgeted their money and the sustainable option costs more, they may not choose it even though it aligns with their values. For example, a H&M T-shirt might cost around £6, while a Fairtrade, organic-cotton T-shirt from Yes Friends costs around £14. Is someone really choosing to buy the less ethical product, or are they choosing what they can afford?

If someone can’t afford something, it feels unfair to say they’re at fault. There’s a push for consumers to make more ethical choices. There’s judgement when they don’t.

I call this misplaced guilt, and misdirected blame.

Most people do not have the luxury of choice. We forget that people often lack the time and money to consistently make good choices. Because of this, I think guilt is often misplaced when we talk about the things we buy.

Where the Responsibility Should Lie

Consumers make choices, but companies design supply chains, set prices and decide how products are produced. Governments and regulators create the rules within which businesses operate. Why should consumers carry the guilt for a system they did not create?

That doesn’t mean our choices are completely meaningless. If we know something is harmful, we should care about it. We can reduce unnecessary consumption, support better alternatives when we can and question the companies we give our money to. This doesn’t mean we should feel guilt when we can’t afford it.

Guilt suggests that we have done something morally wrong. Sometimes, that may be true. But buying an affordable product because it is what we can realistically afford does not necessarily make us a bad person.

Anyway, if the ethical choice is only available to those who can afford it, can we really call it a choice?