Basically the format was, "well what about X Y Z"

X = textile industry issues

Y = environmental issues

Z = industrial farms issues

How is that not whataboutism? Noone is saying those aren't problems, but that's not what the article is about.

Ok well, they literally did say "what about..."

But generally whataboutism refers to comments that try to deter from the original issue by saying "X does it too so it's alright until they stop too". I didn't read the initial comment that way.

Yes, thus the XYZ part of my comment explaining what issues they were trying to deflect with (those issues aren't even in the same industries)

They essentially said "what about... the textile industry, the shipping industry, the farming industry"

Okay? Those are issues, we'll discuss those when an article is posted about them. But currently the battery supply chain child slave labor issue is TFA.

The point was not that it's ok for the mines, the point was that there is nothing unique about them, and there isn't much justification for focussing on them. Not to shield them from scrutiny, but to avoid making them into a distraction from child labor and slavery in general.

If you drummed up a big movement to deal with the problem of child slave labor in lithium or cobalt mines, what good have you done for the world or the kids? The same kids are still at the same risk tomorrow as they were yesterday, they just wind up in some other kind of operation, or in the extreme case maybe their only value (to those people) becomes as organ cattle. Great job!

It's a distraction to pick a specific example like that and present it as some kind of unique problem. What specific work they are put to is not the problem, it's the fact that they are enslaved at all.

It's also to say that "the green revolution is fueld by trafficked child labor" is a mischaracterization, because it is not fuelled by child labor, it merely includes child labor.

The cotton industry in the US was fuelled by slaves, because the labor was 99% done by slaves, not merely that there were some slaves.

The green revolution is such a large thing that 40k children are hardly a drop in it.

Wow. You seem really out of touch with humanity with your zealot goals, watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBGinowoYu4 (use auto-translated subtitles if you don't speak german)

Name even one of these zealot goals please.

Defending child slavery to further the goal of cheap batteries for one.

The Transatlantic Slave Trade involved more than the slaves in Western colonies harvesting raw materials, generally slavery was not used in the rest of the manufacturing process in Europe.

Just because you outsource slavery of a specific process of production doesn't mean you aren't involved in slave trade.

The solutions are to sanction the country doing it as to not reward their behavior and find another means of production, or label those companies involved as terrorists and rescue those children, or pressure the government to shut it down. Or a combination of those.

If your industry cannot adapt or live without slavery then good riddance.

So far your defenses have been:

> Might as well exploit these children, they'd be tortured anyway so there's no point in discussing this!

> Only one part of the supply chain is fueled by child labor, so it's not that bad

Which is really sad.

It doesn't count when it goes against the narrative.