“Made in Honduras”
How the murky world of the blanks industry intersects with geopolitics
In April of this year Juan Orlando Hernándes, the former president of Honduras was sentenced to 45 years in prison for drug trafficking and weapons conspiracy, a spectacular fall from grace for a president once considered one of Washington’s top allies in the region.
During his two term presidency (2014 to 2022) Juan Orlando Hernándes courted the global fashion industry, regularly appearing at summits touting the countries ambitions to expand their production capabilities and become a world leader in sustainable production.
With a long legacy in garment manufacturing, the "Made in Honduras" label is commonly found on cotton basics, thanks to North American-owned blanks brands like Champion, Gildan, Russell Athletic, Bella + Canvas, Next Level, American Apparel, and Fruit of the Loom, all of which produce in the country. As a result, brands such as Noah, Obey Clothing, and Supreme, along with retail chains like Urban Outfitters and PacSun, often use "Made in Honduras" blanks.
The current political situation is marked by significant social unrest and ongoing nationwide demonstrations. Honduras remains one of the most violent countries in Central America, driven by high levels of vulnerability and poverty. Surprising for a country that is among the top garment exporters to the United States.
The story of Honduras’s production history began as far back as the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan devised the Caribbean Basin Initiative. A project that had the dual benefit of creating a production hub that could compete with Asia in close geographical proximity to the US. All the while solidifying US influence in the region in an attempt to quash a move toward left leaning policies in the Caribbean, which Regan deemed a threat to US interests.
Factories in Honduras were set up to operate in what is known as “export processing zones”. EPZ’s are often found in developing regions, where garments are manufactured for export under special regulations that operate outside of the countries usual laws and regulations.
These zones allow corporations to bring in raw materials to a country (ie. cotton) and export finished garments tax free. Tax breaks that don’t extend to local goods made outside of the EPZ, limiting the economic benefit to the county as a whole. The EPZ is a modern day extraction unit where labor laws are poorly enforced, aiding international companies to cut costs (a.k.a pay workers less) evade laws and turn a blind eye to violence.
As described in Naomi Kleins “No Logo” (published in 1999 but still relevant today) the cult of “brand” has been built upon a trend towards offshore production, driven by the pursuit of cheap labor and fewer regulations. The majority of garment workers in Honduras are young women unaware of their rights. The country has one of the highest rates of violence against trade unionists in the world. In recent years there have been several high profile murders of prominent activists. Including four union leaders from the Gildan factory in Choloma. Xiomara Beatriz Cocas, Delmer Josué García, José Rufino Ortiz, and Lesther Arnulfo Almendare being killed by unidentified gunmen in 2023.
There is an argument that we hear often about “creating jobs”. While the garment industry does create millions of jobs globally, particularly for women. It’s worth noting that they are often unsafe, exploitative and in some of the poorest countries in the world. Honduras is a case study: in which US corporations and US government agencies have worked together to bring cheap fashion to consumers globally, framing job creation as a blessing for a struggling economy while simultaneously engaging in political corruption that keeps local population poor.
The violence in Honduras is a direct consequence of the export processing industry, but it doesn’t have to be inevitable. The companies currently operating in Honduras are some of the biggest on the planet. For context Gildan’s production volume is reported to be approximately 900 million garments per year. These brands have both the choice and the economic power to contribute to political and social reform, invest in the communities that produce for them and assure their customers complete transparency over the garments they are buying.
Over the past five years, as the demand for blanks has surged due to the growing merch market across various industries, producers have continued to expand and make record profits. Brands purchasing these blanks for as little as $0.75 per T-shirt often turn a blind eye to the true cost of human suffering and the environmental impact, leaving future generations to clean up the mess.
FURTHER READING:
https://www.fashionrevolution.org/meet-me-at-the-airport-mr-president/