“VOTE” Paraphernalia Sold by Fashion Brands is Performative Activism

Fashion brands commercialize off political messages without affecting voter turnout.

Photo: Filippo Fior / GoRunway

High fashion and mass politics do not usually intersect, but with an increasingly socially aware consumer base, many brands are attempting to appear more “woke.” Earlier this month during Spring Paris Fashion Week, Louis Vuitton creative director Nicolas Ghesquière debuted his show with a brief statement emblazoned on a shirt: “Vote.”

Despite the lack of context for the slogan, the “Vote” shirt sparked discussion about the importance of incorporating social activism into fashion. Rather than advocating for a particular political party or ideology, the slogan is undoubtedly a neutral and objective statement intended to reference the upcoming United States presidential election in November. However, the lack of context begs the question of whether merely sparking conversation is enough for a brand to be considered politically outspoken.

“Fashion has and will always be a way to express oneself,” SynesthASIA Executive Director Emma Brazeau and Communications Executive Anastasia Triadafilopoulos said in an email to The McGill Tribune. “Political statements [by brands] can also be used to help educate people—and I think that's an important feature that brands should keep in mind.” 

Actress Julianne Moore in Christian Siriano's "VOTE" dress, spring 2021 collection (via Instagram).

Louis Vuitton’s incorporation of the single word “Vote” into a collection will not, ultimately, influence voter turnout, nor will it be the sole factor in convincing people to vote. It also narrowly focuses on one element of political elections without acknowledging systemic issues like voter suppression and gerrymandering, simplifying the task of changemaking without addressing how difficult and unjust the current systems in place are. Christian Siriano’s New York Fashion Week “Vote” designs might have looked good on celebrities, but after the buzz dies out, the gesture feels performative and removed from most voters, especially young students—undoubtedly, these high fashion adaptations of civic engagement are out of touch. 

Nevertheless, it did not take long for American fast fashion brands like The Gap and American Eagle to capitalize off bandwagon activism and the resurgence of neutrally “political” trends. In a country that is so divisively partisan, the neutrality of the one-word slogan feels like a catch-all statement that indiscriminately encourages people to be civically active. If the use of “Black Lives Matter” on clothing sold by big retailers at the height of protests this summer seemed like forced and lazy activism, the “Vote” trend is even more so, because brands no longer need to commit to a specific set of values to promote. It is important for young people as consumers to be aware of the motivations behind certain seemingly “woke” implementations of politically charged messages within fashion. As students, contributing towards the commercialization of politics is arguably not the most effective way of showing support and generating real results. If anything, it feels like brands are latching onto the “Vote” message to prove their contributions to activist discussions and receive praise for their efforts. 

If that’s the case, it might seem difficult to determine how students can effectively show their support for causes without contributing to the commodification and dilution of the political message. Of course, it is crucial to continue to support the grassroots movements and activists where they exist, rather than allowing a multimillion dollar company to take advantage of one’s good intentions. If students want to engage in corporate activism, they should stay informed about the practices of the companies they support and buy from. 

Patagonia, a clothing company known for its climate crisis advocacy, recently began sewing the statement “Vote the assholes out” onto their clothing tags and providing resources on their website to help people vote. The company’s past emphasis on the importance of climate activism and sustainable practices, combined with their new message—included on all clothing tags with no additional charge—clearly communicates a commitment to their message. The initiative is more sincerely aligned with their mission as a brand, and feels more genuine than many other clothing brands’ empty attempts at encouraging people to vote. Patagonia strikes a balance of incorporating political messages into their fashion through their business practices, not just capitalizing on this brand image. For Brazeau and Triadafilopoulos, statements that align with brands’ substantive commitments are the most impactful. 

“Large clothing companies often stay neutral in political conversations because they don't want to risk losing a large part of their clientele,”  Brazeau and Triadafilopoulos wrote. “While I don’t necessarily think clothing companies should side with political candidates/ parties, I do think they have a responsibility to engage in meaningful political conversations on issues such as racism, climate change etc.” 

Although “Vote” paraphernalia is a nice gesture of support for upholding civic responsibility to participate in democratic processes, it is still just that—a gesture. It sparks conversation, but at the end of the day, “Vote” merchandise alone with little brand interest in being politically involved will not meaningfully influence voter turnout. Careless activism by clothing brands only diminishes the political impact of these mass-produced clothing items. In avoiding performative activism and feeding into the capitalist mindset of turning any message into profit, consumers must be wary, and put their money where their mouth is.