Mission Statement:

My research suggests that, though some people have heard the term "human trafficking" not many know that it is simply a euphemism for another word: slavery.

Yes, contrary to popular belief the practice of slavery thrives around today, both internationally and right here in America.

The purpose of this blog is to provide useful, credible resources to show that human trafficking and slavery are the same, redefining the term so that you, the reader, will be armed with the understanding you need to comprehend the inner workings of this shadowy practice.

This Table of Contents describes the "Pages" that appear on the sidebar. It should help guide you to the salient parts of this educational website.

Page 1: Popular Misconceptions about human trafficking

Common Misconceptions about Slavery
Although many people are aware of the term "human trafficking," not many know that it is simply another term for slavery. When people hear the term "human trafficking" their response tends to be confusion. They don't know exactly what it is; however, when confronted with the term "slavery" they often respond with disgust, anger, and moral outrage. For this reason, it is vital to begin to undermine people's misconceptions about human trafficking, creating a morally fueled interest that may then be sated with well-researched information.
 
The research in this section is aimed at delineating the common misconceptions about slavery in order to complicate or disprove them in later sections. Legal scholars generally point out two types of slavery “de jure” and “de facto.” Human trafficking most often falls under the category of de jure slavery, and is, therefore, excluded from the term "slavery" in most people's minds. In accordance with the overall purpose of the blog, to educate people on modern occurrences of slavery, this section will seek to show the most common misconception: that “de jure” slavery is not slavery at all.

De Facto vs. De Jure Slavery
To begin to undermine people’s assumptions, we must first understand what they are. To accomplish this, it is necessary to define these two terms: “de jure” and “de facto” in order to make the rest of the section easy to understand. Please note that, since these definitions were largely inferred from the subtext of many different readings, they are not cited.  

De facto slavery is sometimes called “traditional slavery” or chattel slavery. It is the type of slavery that those who read American history may be familiar with. It is characterized by social dislocation, public sale of human beings supported by a sustaining system of laws, and forced manual labor by a person or persons marked for life by some permanent feature such as skin color.

De facto slavery is described in vivid terms by the life of former slave and renowned abolitionist leader Frederick Douglas:

The son of a slave woman and an unknown white man…During [his youth Douglas] was exposed to the degradations of slavery, witnessing firsthand brutal whippings and spending much timecold and hungry. When he was eight he was sent to Baltimore to live with a ship carpenter …before being sent back to the country, where he was hired out to a farm run by a notoriously brutal ‘slavebreaker’ …whipped daily and barely fed, Douglass was ‘broken in body, soul, and spirit.’ (“Frederick Douglass”)

All of the key features of de facto slavery are here. Douglas’ parentage marked him for a life of servitude. His masters determined his social surroundings and forced his obedience through legally sanctioned violence.  
De jure slavery, in contrast, occurs sporadically, is perpetrated outside of a supporting legal framework, and usually happens to a person or persons who are “marked” not for life, but for one of two key reasons: the first being some temporary affiliation, such as political identity, the second being singled out for short-term servitude from some group that has been historically discriminated against, such as women or certain ethnic groups.  

The experience of Gold miners in Peru exemplifies De jure slavery clearly. When rich veins of gold were discovered in Peru, many people voluntarily rushed there to try to make their fortunes; however, they discovered de jure slavery when they arrived. The Guardian reports:

The dream of riches vanished when they found themselves in remote, squalid camps and were told that they would receive no wages until they repaid a supposed debt to the labor broker who hired them. Meanwhile, they continued to rack up debts for food or other items in bonded labor that sometimes continued for several years. (Fraser)

Here the marks of de jure slavery are illustrated clearly. People enslaved by a debt system that, while technically legal, is certainly being abused. The social dislocation and enforcement of labor occur not due to these people’s ethnicity, but for more mutable traits: their economic status and desire for wealth.

Connecting Definitions and Misconceptions
My research in this subject has led me to the conclusion that what most people think of as slavery is called “de facto” slavery by those who make a study of the law. This next section will provides quotes and evidence from my research demonstrating this popular misconception.

Text to Follow…

Faser, Barbara. “Tarnished gold: why Peru’s forced labor mining matters to the US.” The Guardian. The
      Guardian News and Media Limited, 16 Oct. 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2-14.

“Frederick Douglass.” Africans in America: Judgment Day Resources. PBS Online, 1999. Web. 17 Mar. 
      2014.  
 

No comments:

Post a Comment