So are you saying that making slavery illegal hasn't stopped people from trafficking slaves? That people will still do it in shady alleyways, vans, etc?

Well, America's War on Drugs, a more modern example, just put a bunch of people in prison and made gangs and cartels rich. When Slavery became illegal, it never really stopped, just became an underground thing. (No, I'm not comparing the way we handle drugs to the way we handled slavery, just an example.)

[quote]When Slavery became illegal, it never really stopped, just became an underground thing.[/quote] Disagree. There are different kinds of slavery. African slavery for agricultural labor (the cornerstone of the plantations system) disappeared. Southern landholders tried to come up with workarounds----sharecropping, prison work gangs, and now migrant workers----but the practice of slavery in that arena was abolished. Slavery for -blam!- exploitation----"human trafficking'---still exists because the demand for such services is high (and like the drug trade) basically all enforcement efforts are focused on the suppliers, not the demand. Getting rid of African slavery was successful because the nations went after the DEMAND (the owners), not the suppliers (traders). Until law enforcement goes after the demand-side of the equation (the "johns") they'll never get rid of human trafficking. Because whatever pressure they put on the suppliers will just be factored into the cost of doing business.

You make really good points, but many people consider it slavery, and slavery, as a term, has many definitions, so I guess it depends on perspective/viewpoint.

It is a form of slavery...and the reason why we have been unsuccessful in stamping it out is because we're operating from the wrong paradigm ("its a morals/vice problem"), and as a result we go after the wrong end of the problem. So we punish the victims...and the suppliers....and there are almost no consequences for being part of the "demand" side of the equation. Which means that---for enough money---someone is always going to be willing to risk meeting that demand.

How do you deal with a demand like that though? That’s the issue. The political focus is always on the traffickers and the victims I think almost exclusively because that’s what the media shows the public, and so that’s what the public get mad at politicians about. I think I’ve only ever once seen a news story about a person’s experience here (the UK) after being trafficked (other than the Epstein case), and since then I’ve always noticed that as a problem. Institutionalised slavery was ‘easy’ (relatively speaking) to deal with because the ‘demand’ was run-of-the-mill business owners who were very publicly doing the thing people wanted to get rid of, at least initially. But something like human trafficking nowadays… the web must be so convoluted and secretive… shows how valuable Epstein would have been that’s all I’ll say.

[quote]The political focus is always on the traffickers and the victims I think almost exclusively because that’s what the media shows the public, and so that’s what the public get mad at politicians about[/quote] ...and because they are the "outgroups". The ones with no power or status WITHIN the system. So they are convenient scapegoats. But when you start looking at the DEMAND? That's when (like drug use) it starts hitting uncomfortably close to home. You start seeing friends....possibily family. Otherwise "respectable" people. ...and that illusion is what you go after and you start to dispel. You start prosecuting the "consumers". Many communities engaged in public shaming, by publishing the arrests in local media. The notion that these are "victimless" crimes (as a way of excusing the exploitation of other human beings) needs to be confronted and dealt with. I disagree that African slavery was "easy" to deal with. Going after the demand meant going after the most powerful people in half the country....fighting a war that killed---killed mind you----THREE PERCENT of the adult population (imagine fighting a war today that killed 9 million Americans). A war that this country in many ways still hasn't recovered from, and is still a demon that controls our politics from the shadows. But this country did what was necessary to end it. They just failed to follow through on what was necessary to rebuild the country in the aftermath. The problem with human trafficking isn't the secrecy. Its the fact that most of the "consumers" consider the odds of them getting caught to be low....and the consequences for BEING caught to be an embarrassing slap-on-the-wrist. That needs to change. Until you start to suppress the demand, people will find a way to supply it no matter how much pressure you put on the suppliers.

My point was these were easily identifiable public figures who were very publicly doing what people wanted to get rid of. If you were against slavery it was very obvious who you were going after, you didn’t need to uncover a secret cabal of slave owners or rely on scandals in the media to out a public figure as ‘someone who owns slaves’.