Argument Analysis on Human Trafficking Essay Example

the rise, therefore, requires a change in perspective when devising solutions. However, the author fails to articulate clearly how separating emotions help in addressing the human trafficking menace. The evidence provided also does not support the thesis statement strongly as there are several identifiable gaps.

The author then tries to dispel the common belief that sex trading is the most common form of human trafficking. The author uses a qualifier that “labor trafficking is probably more widespread” than sex trafficking (Feingold, 2005). This casts a shadow on how confident he feels about the information he is presenting. The author claims that the statistics on the end-use of trafficked people are unreliable thus dispelling his view that labor trafficking is more diverse (Feingold, 2005). Additionally, he also uses logos form of appeal to the reader that his claim is sensible since the labor market is far greater than the sex one thus labor trafficking exceeds sex trafficking. Such appeal to probability demonstrates the author’s fallacious thinking. Therefore, his reasoning is subject to question thus cannot change the readers opinion to believe that most victims are trafficked into the labor industry rather than the sex one.
The author also fails to show the relationship between secure borders and the increased smuggling of individuals. A different type of evidence with clear cut causal relationships citing the tightened border restrictions and the resultant rise in smuggling would have provided better information to convince the reader that tightening border security does not prevent human trafficking. Additionally, the author cites that trafficking involves disorganized crime in most instances (Feingold, 2005). However, he offers contradicts this with evidence from his examples of organized gangs

networks such as the Japanese mafia (yakuza) that controls most of the venues where most trafficked girls end up. Also, the author provides supporting evidence by comparing the organized crime illicit drug trade market worth $320 billion with the cheaper $32billion trafficking business (Feingold, 2005). This proves that human trafficking has profits that could attract organized criminal gangs, negating his previous point.

The author does not take a solid stand on whether legalizing prostitution helps to curb trafficking. Instead, he opts to take a neutral position which does not support the thesis statement by citing that “it depends on how it is done” (Feingold, 2005). Also, he uses logos to appeal to the reader that legalization of prostitution would increase the demand for victims. Going by this logic, the author commits a fallacy of begging the question by claiming that if that was true, “the state of Nevada should be awash with foreign sex slaves” (Feingold, 2005). The author also uses the reduced number of prosecutions to dispel the belief that trial will stop traffickers without considering other factors that may lead to the reduced numbers such as law enforcement practices and fear of victimization. The author also claims that prosecution and sanctions cannot decrease human trafficking without offering substantial evidence why.
However, Feingold’s puts up an important point to discourage the returning of the victims of trafficking back to their home country. He uses supporting evidence from a study by the United Nations to prove the difficulty of reintegrating victims back to their society due to the lack of a legal status. It is clear that the lack of proof of citizenship impedes reintegration efforts (Feingold,

2005). The author uses pathos form of appeal in this paragraph by seeking the reader’s pity for the victims who may not have a home to return to (Feingold, 2005). Finally, the author uses hyperbole to explain why poverty is not concurrent with trafficking but rather the changing views of the victims (Feingold, 2005). “The draw of bright lights and big cities” is used to make an exaggeration of what lures victims into trafficking. However, the author does not make a convincing argument against poverty as a driver of human traffic.

In conclusion, David A. Feingold’s essay on human trafficking sheds light on the extent of human trafficking. However, he fails to provide evidence to support his thesis statement that supports a change of attitudes on human trafficking. Most of his arguments are substantial and can be easily be dismantled by simple counter logic. Despite using several rhetorical features, he fails to provide supporting evidence and statistics to back up his claims. As a result, his essay on human trafficking fails to communicate his ideologies to change the readers mind. However, they open room for further discussions and evaluations of existing prejudices so as to draft practical solutions on how to end the human trafficking.