The "Cultural Context" Excuse

[Esquilax]

Yeah, that called being a hypocrite.

Like "protesting" how veal is raised and eating it twice a week.

Or saying you do not believe is spanking,  but you beat the crap out of your own kids.

You can't say you are against slavery if, EVERY Aspect of your life depends on it.

If you like and will not willingly give up the life you live that is provided by modern slavery, that is the same as you endorsing it despite how you might protest.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/beyondslav...dual-consu

The above website agrees in that being complacent about your current goods and life style.

But the real question you should be asking is what would the current slaves do if they did not have their slave jobs? how would they support themselves and live?

1: Even if you're correct, that still makes you a worse asshole, so you really have no reason to be smug.

2: "You do it too!" is a logical fallacy, not an argument.

3: Complicity in something we're against, where that complicity comes as a result of buying into a complex, multi-tiered system of interconnecting business partnerships over multiple countries, the nature of which is so complex it takes teams of people working for each business to properly keep track of, in which the thing we're supposedly complicit in is actively and consistently hidden from view by the machinations of immense corporate forces pouring sums of money so large many of us will never get close to seeing them in our lifetimes into that endeavor is not hypocrisy. It's a simple acknowledgement that there are limits to what we are capable of keeping track of. It's simply dishonest conflation to pretend that this is the same as active complicity in slavery... which is kind of your stock in trade, so it's hardly surprising. If you didn't have oversimplification of complex geopolitical ideas that you both don't understand and aren't particularly interested in beyond how they can be used to leverage your own sense of smug satisfaction, what would you have?