3 ms·

I dislike internet flamewars with glib calls for "source pls", but this seems like a pretty extraordinary claim to make with no substantiating evidence. Over 10

I dislike internet flamewars with glib calls for "source pls", but this seems like a pretty extraordinary claim to make with no substantiating evidence. Over 1000? According to who? I found this wapo article from 2012: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fair-food-program-helps-end-the-use-of-slavery-in-the-tomato-fields/2012/09/02/788f1a1a-f39c-11e1-892d-bc92fee603a7_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fair-food-program-he... It says the justice dept prosecuted 7 cases since 1997. It says over 1000 people were affected. Are you counting each person as an instance?

matthewdgreen 6y ago
Why wouldn't you count a human being held in slavery as an instance of slavery? I'm genuinely confused what you're getting at here.
- branweb 6y ago
  I'm not saying you shouldn't. I'm just trying to get some clarification on the original statement. The source I was able to dig up is from 8 years ago, and was reporting on incidents stretching back 23 years ago. The op mentioned 1000 instances in the past 10 years. I just want more info on what they meant.
  - matthewdgreen 6y ago
    Ok, but you easily dug up an article that confirmed it. Even down to the number of people who were affected and the time period. But instead of just posting the source (which I do appreciate), you seem to now have a problem with the definition of the word "instance" as used to refer to the enslavement of a single human. What definition would you prefer that is more standard or appropriate? ETA I am now reading article after article about this issue, and the fact that this particular industry seems to have cleaned up its act in 2012 doesn't make me feel better about any of it.
    - branweb 6y ago
      Doesn't make you feel any better about the original claim or about the fact that the abuses took place? To your first point: I have a problem with the unsourced claim that there have been 1000 instances in the past 10 years, which I could not find a source to confirm. To your second about which term I would prefer, I don't set myself up as an authority. But if the op meant 1000 people, he should have said 1000 people. I think it would be clearer than "instance." When I first read that, I wasn't sure if it means "a person" or "a case when a tomato farmer got busted." If the latter, then it would have been way more than 1000 people affected.
      - matthewdgreen 6y ago
        A person being enslaved seems like a perfectly reasonable definition of an "instance of slavery." You turned up a source that seemed broadly consistent with this, and inconsistent with the "1,000 farmer busts" reading. Then you asked if the person was counting each person as an instance, which clearly they were. That's why I asked what the problem was.

matthewdgreen 6y ago

Why wouldn't you count a human being held in slavery as an instance of slavery? I'm genuinely confused what you're getting at here.

branweb 6y ago
I'm not saying you shouldn't. I'm just trying to get some clarification on the original statement. The source I was able to dig up is from 8 years ago, and was reporting on incidents stretching back 23 years ago. The op mentioned 1000 instances in the past 10 years. I just want more info on what they meant.
- matthewdgreen 6y ago
  Ok, but you easily dug up an article that confirmed it. Even down to the number of people who were affected and the time period. But instead of just posting the source (which I do appreciate), you seem to now have a problem with the definition of the word "instance" as used to refer to the enslavement of a single human. What definition would you prefer that is more standard or appropriate? ETA I am now reading article after article about this issue, and the fact that this particular industry seems to have cleaned up its act in 2012 doesn't make me feel better about any of it.
  - branweb 6y ago
    Doesn't make you feel any better about the original claim or about the fact that the abuses took place? To your first point: I have a problem with the unsourced claim that there have been 1000 instances in the past 10 years, which I could not find a source to confirm. To your second about which term I would prefer, I don't set myself up as an authority. But if the op meant 1000 people, he should have said 1000 people. I think it would be clearer than "instance." When I first read that, I wasn't sure if it means "a person" or "a case when a tomato farmer got busted." If the latter, then it would have been way more than 1000 people affected.
    - matthewdgreen 6y ago
      A person being enslaved seems like a perfectly reasonable definition of an "instance of slavery." You turned up a source that seemed broadly consistent with this, and inconsistent with the "1,000 farmer busts" reading. Then you asked if the person was counting each person as an instance, which clearly they were. That's why I asked what the problem was.