Who eats Hershey's and or Nestle's Chocolate?

[AngryCanadian]

Meh i dont even eat those products anymore.

[GunnyFreedom]

Look, Gunny, I really and sincerely did not say that. Please, please, go back and read my post where you think I was saying you were wrong about everything and I think and hope you will be able to see I did not write that. But the bottom line is, for whatever reason that is the message you received, and so for all practical purposes, I suppose I did send you that message, unintentional though it was.

Please accept my apology for my offensive statements and awkward and ineffective communication. I do not think you are necessarily wrong about anything, much less everything.

Here is the offending paragraph that seems to have set all this off. I was just trying to make what I think is an interesting though perhaps difficult-to-follow economics point, not to set myself up as a mind-reader. If you can think of a way that the paragraph could be reworded to eliminate the "telling you what you think" aspect while still making my point, I will be thrilled to edit the original post to incorporate your fix.

Look, if you are serious that you were being sincere, and you disagree with what I have discussed on this thread, then you don't do zero research and claim that the guy who is 15 years deep into this is just wrong because your opinion says so. You would be laughed out of pretty much any intellectual debate on the planet with that approach.

Instead, go out and get read up on the subject, and then come back with evidence to support your claims and then state your arguments.

Bear in mind that the situation today is way way better than it was 5 years ago when the OP was posted -- which in and of itself invalidates your claim that there is nothing to be done on the demand side to solve the problem. A lot has been done on the demand side to address this problem, and the child cocoa slavery problem has already seen some 50% reduction in the last 5 years. So addressing the demand side to solve this problem is not merely theoretical, it is already happening and it is already working.

I get that there are some 'libertarians' who just don't give a damn that their hershey bar comes only at the cost of dead children who are stolen from their families and unwillingly enslaved at gunpoint. I have a hard time considering such people 'human,' much less 'libertarian.' I also understand that this outlook is part and parcel to objectivism, and this is one of the reasons I utterly reject objectivism.

Child cocoa slavery in the Ivory Coast is real, even if the situation is a lot better than it was 5 years ago. The very fact alone that the situation has markedly improved in the last five years puts to lie your position that my recommended course of activism will not help. It's already helped, and it's continuing to improve the situation as I write this.

It's possible that you just don't care, even if all of this is true. Close to 10% of these forums don't care if they contribute to the deaths of these children. It's stuff like that that makes me ashamed to be associated with such beings.

But the bottom line is, if you are legitimately sincere in your arguments, you don't go around having done (as you yourself admit) zero research on the subject and claiming that the guy 15 years deep into it is all wet. Instead, go do some research yourself and come back with something other than your opinions to support your claims.

[anaconda]

I'm glad this thread resurfaced. I missed it before and now I want to scrutinize it and many of the links posted.

Idea: Why don't the companies that don't use slavery put a big "Slavery Free" message on their chocolate bar labels?

Also, what's 2 or 3 good non-slavery go-to brands for super market chocolate bars?

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm glad this thread resurfaced. I missed it before and now I want to scrutinize it and many of the links posted.

Idea: Why don't the companies that don't use slavery put a big "Slavery Free" message on their chocolate bar labels?

Also, what's 2 or 3 good non-slavery go-to brands for super market chocolate bars?

Well, "fair trade" = "slavery free" but they have to pay good money to be certified. Same with Organic = slavery free (because no slaver beans are certified organic) but again they have to pay good money to be slavery free (oops, ETA: ) Certified Organic.

If you do not want to bear the burden of certification costs, and still want to avoid contributing to child slavery, the best way to do it is to buy "single source" cocoa. Some chocolate is labeled as coming from 'a single plantation in Costa Rica' for example, and you can be confident that that was not produced by slavery.

Others, like Lindt, don't actually say ANYTHING but if you contact them personally they will tell you they stopped buying from the Ivory Coast in 2006 due to the slavery issue, and now buy exclusively from Ghana, which is also slavery free. Now some of the more hysterical cocoa slavery sites will also tell you to avoid Lindt because of child labor, but in Ghana the "Child Labor" comes from families working their own farms with their own children, which honestly doesn't bother me at all, so I have no problem buying Lindt.

Likewise Ghirardelli is owned by Lindt, and they, too get their cocoa from Ghana rather than the Ivory Coast. I buy Ghirardelli pure cocoa powder, and it is better than anything Hershey's ever dreamed of.

Lindt and Ghirardelli are both widely available in supermarkets, and they are both superb chocolatiers.

[GunnyFreedom]

Also, some kinds of Mars owned Dove have the "Rainforest Alliance" frog



This is also a good indicator of slavery free chocolate. With RFA, however, they allow certification of brands that are only 30% or more "safe" however if the cocoa (or coffee) is less than 100% they are required to put a percentage figure immediately below the RFA logo. So if you see the RFA logo without a percentage figure you know for a fact it's 100% slavery free, while if it has the RFA logo and "60%" immediately below it, then some or all of the balance of 40% may (but not necessarily) come from slavers.

The Dove bars which carry the RFA logo that I have seen are all 100%.

[GunnyFreedom]

Lindt, Ghirardelli, and Dove are all widely available at most supermarkets, and even if only a portion of the Dove chocolate are actually RFA certified, that should be enough to keep you in chocolate at any normal grocery store. By the time you grow weary of those brands, the situation will be an order of magnitude again better, and there will be an even wider selection of blood free chocolate at your average grocery store.

As of now, even WalMart has a decent selection of premium slavery free chocolates, you just have to know what you are looking for. It's not at all like it was when I first posted this in 2009. Back then it was difficult to buy chocolate that was not produced by slaves, today it is quite easy.

[GunnyFreedom]

Also, here is a list of some of the lesser known brands, many of which may show up in your grocery store, including such brands as:

Ben and Jerry's
Chuao
Dagoba
Endangered Species
Green and Black's
Newman's Own, and
Scharffen Berger

The "Whole Foods Brand Generic 365" is also slavery free, but I doubt you are going to Whole Foods for your chocolate. However, if you do, the store brand is pretty inexpensive, and it's slavery free.

http://vision.ucsd.edu/~kbranson/sto...eproducts.html

There are other sites, but you have to be somewhat careful to examine the motives. For instance, the "Food Is Power" list has a much larger list of even lesser known brands, but the list is more about US politics than African slavery. For instance, they removed a brand called "Edensoy" fro their safe-list because they opposed the Obamacare birth control mandates

http://www.foodispower.org/chocolate-list/

[GunnyFreedom]

Many of the brands that are currently slavery free now, were NOT slavery free in 2009 when the OP was posted, so much of the earlier data in this thread may be out of date.

[amy31416]

Also, here is a list of some of the lesser known brands, many of which may show up in your grocery store, including such brands as:

Ben and Jerry's
Chuao
Dagoba
Endangered Species
Green and Black's
Newman's Own, and
Scharffen Berger

The "Whole Foods Brand Generic 365" is also slavery free, but I doubt you are going to Whole Foods for your chocolate. However, if you do, the store brand is pretty inexpensive, and it's slavery free.

http://vision.ucsd.edu/~kbranson/sto...eproducts.html

There are other sites, but you have to be somewhat careful to examine the motives. For instance, the "Food Is Power" list has a much larger list of even lesser known brands, but the list is more about US politics than African slavery. For instance, they removed a brand called "Edensoy" fro their safe-list because they opposed the Obamacare birth control mandates

http://www.foodispower.org/chocolate-list/

Well that's good. I have about 10lbs of Scharffen Berger cocoa that I bought quite a while ago in the freezer, I was wondering.

[Suzanimal]

Well that's good. I have about 10lbs of Scharffen Berger cocoa that I bought quite a while ago in the freezer, I was wondering.

Note to self:
When the shtf, Amy has a stockpile of cocoa, Gunny can make coffee, and Oyarde has all the pitchforks.

[anaconda]

What else besides cocoa is produced with slave labor?

[amy31416]

Note to self:
When the shtf, Amy has a stockpile of cocoa, Gunny can make coffee, and Oyarde has all the pitchforks.

I generally buy in bulk when it makes sense. Amazon is great. The best present I ever got was one of those giant freezers--keeps the bugs out, keeps nuts/coffee fresh, etc.

[scottditzen]

Thanks alot for helping to bring this issue to the forefront.

Also, here is a list of some of the lesser known brands, many of which may show up in your grocery store, including such brands as:

Ben and Jerry's
Chuao
Dagoba
Endangered Species
Green and Black's
Newman's Own, and
Scharffen Berger

The "Whole Foods Brand Generic 365" is also slavery free, but I doubt you are going to Whole Foods for your chocolate. However, if you do, the store brand is pretty inexpensive, and it's slavery free.

http://vision.ucsd.edu/~kbranson/sto...eproducts.html

There are other sites, but you have to be somewhat careful to examine the motives. For instance, the "Food Is Power" list has a much larger list of even lesser known brands, but the list is more about US politics than African slavery. For instance, they removed a brand called "Edensoy" fro their safe-list because they opposed the Obamacare birth control mandates

http://www.foodispower.org/chocolate-list/

[GunnyFreedom]

What else besides cocoa is produced with slave labor?

Coffee, to a much lesser extent. As in, not kidnapping and bullwhipping children to death, but still some pretty gruesome practices.

Same rules apply; anything "Fair Trade" or "Organic" or "Rain Forest Alliance" is good to go. Look for Single-Sources and such. I do, but because the problem is not as emergent, I don't push it as much. People already think I'm a picky freak.

[helmuth_hubener]

Look, if you are serious that you were being sincere, and you disagree with what I have discussed on this thread, then you don't do zero research and claim that the guy who is 15 years deep into this is just wrong because your opinion says so. You would be laughed out of pretty much any intellectual debate on the planet with that approach.

Instead, go out and get read up on the subject, and then come back with evidence to support your claims and then state your arguments.

Bear in mind that the situation today is way way better than it was 5 years ago when the OP was posted -- which in and of itself invalidates your claim that there is nothing to be done on the demand side to solve the problem. A lot has been done on the demand side to address this problem, and the child cocoa slavery problem has already seen some 50% reduction in the last 5 years. So addressing the demand side to solve this problem is not merely theoretical, it is already happening and it is already working.

I get that there are some 'libertarians' who just don't give a damn that their hershey bar comes only at the cost of dead children who are stolen from their families and unwillingly enslaved at gunpoint. I have a hard time considering such people 'human,' much less 'libertarian.' I also understand that this outlook is part and parcel to objectivism, and this is one of the reasons I utterly reject objectivism.

Child cocoa slavery in the Ivory Coast is real, even if the situation is a lot better than it was 5 years ago. The very fact alone that the situation has markedly improved in the last five years puts to lie your position that my recommended course of activism will not help. It's already helped, and it's continuing to improve the situation as I write this.

It's possible that you just don't care, even if all of this is true. Close to 10% of these forums don't care if they contribute to the deaths of these children. It's stuff like that that makes me ashamed to be associated with such beings.

But the bottom line is, if you are legitimately sincere in your arguments, you don't go around having done (as you yourself admit) zero research on the subject and claiming that the guy 15 years deep into it is all wet. Instead, go do some research yourself and come back with something other than your opinions to support your claims.

Am I to understand that you do accept my apology, or that you do not?

Also, I would once again let you know that these statements:

"claim that the guy who is 15 years deep into this is just wrong because your opinion says so"

"claiming that the guy 15 years deep into it is all wet"

are incorrect and mischaracterize my view.

Gunny, there is no reason to get all worked up and in a bundle. I do not believe you understand the things which I wrote. You are reacting emotionally without understanding. I apologized, I meant you no harm, I have nothing but good feelings toward you, and so I don't know what else I can do.

Shall I give you "hugs" ala HB?

[helmuth_hubener]

By the way, I bought some Nestle's chocolate chips yesterday just for you.

[heavenlyboy34]

Note to self:
When the shtf, Amy has a stockpile of cocoa, Gunny can make coffee, and Oyarde has all the pitchforks.

Uncle Oyarde also has all teh gold and silver.

[amy31416]

Uncle Oyarde also has all teh gold and silver.

I live closer to Oyarde than you do, and I'll brew the beer/distill the liquor. No gold/silver for you.

I make cheese too--beat that.

[euphemia]

The problem is not Nestles. The problem is the way Africa treats Africans. It might be that a more ethical use of its resources would result in more profit, yet they continue to stick with a cruel, antiquated way of doing things that keeps power in the hands of a few.

[GunnyFreedom]

The problem is not Nestles. The problem is the way Africa treats Africans. It might be that a more ethical use of its resources would result in more profit, yet they continue to stick with a cruel, antiquated way of doing things that keeps power in the hands of a few.

If that were true, then it wouldn't be possible to avoid buying slaver beans simply by going 100 miles down the coast. But it is. There is a wealth of chocolate that comes from Africa, but not from slaves.

[helmuth_hubener]

Hershey's is a great American business, heroically providing value in the face of overwhelming opposition, regulation, taxes, and obstacles. The hard work and willingness to take risks and put off rewards of the Hershey's businessmen brings a little bit of additional happiness to millions of people each day. I say: my hat's off to Hershey's! Good job, running a good business! American business gets precious little praise; precious little credit; and so much of what we enjoy in our lives today -- almost all of our wealth -- we owe to the efforts of the unsung American businessman.

So for today, at least, on one little obscure corner of the internet on just one little forum, I am going to buck that trend and say: "Thank you, all you businessmen behind Hershey's Chocolate. Thank you for all the work you have done and continue to do to improve my quality of life. Keep up the good work. I and most of the other libertarians of the world support you. We've got your back."

[GunnyFreedom]

Ladies and gentlemen, behold the psychopathy of objectivism. There is nothing libertarian about objectivism. Instead, objectivism could just as easily be called "what's in it for me-ism," and if "what's in it for me" is enhanced by the presence of abject slavery, then they will support and defend that slavery by whatever means pleases them personally. This is the base philosophy behind defending slavery in early America because it made cotton cheap. Unlike capitalisms "enlightened self-interest" it is all the self interest, with none of the enlightenment.

In this thread, you can see it for yourself. He started out by claiming I was factually wrong, and when I called him out to produce evidence of his claims, he then claimed that he never said I was factually wrong. And then he proceeded from that argument to lobby for doing business with the slavers anyway because they are 'great businesses.'

There is nothing "liberty" about that.

Followers of objectivism will happily advocate for the most horrific kinds of slavery and tyranny if they, themselves, benefit personally. There is no liberty to be found there, and objectivism should not be considered in any way, shape, or form a 'libertarian' philosophy. Simply because a famous objectivist once wrote a book that highlighted the dangers of socialism, does not make it a philosophy of liberty. Ayn Rand herself advocated for a war of extermination against all Muslims, because it would have benefited her, personally. She was indeed true to the core of "what's in it for me-ism" until the very end.

[euphemia]

But isn't it strange that we had all kinds of sanctions against South Africa when they practiced apartheid, but ignored what is going on in the rest of Africa?

[helmuth_hubener]

For anyone who, like the OP, did not understand some of my economic mumbo-jumbo, here is another go at an explanation.

As free marketeers, we sometimes hear those around us of different mindsets bring up the objection to the market: "What about racism/sexism?" If there weren't laws mandating that no one be racist nor sexist, then business owners would be free to be racist or sexist.

We have a great standard economic response and explanation to that. Yes, let's say there were a bad business owner who wouldn't hire blacks, or who wouldn't pay women as much as he pays men, because he's misogynist. On a free market, all that means is that other businesses now have a profit opportunity. Anyone willing to hire these people the other guy's discriminating against and pay them fairly will capitalize on a huge profit opportunity left open by the other's irrationality. So, the free market abhors discrimination. It makes it very costly. There will never be a "wage gap" between two equally productive persons. The profit motive will correct and undo any prejudiced businessmen that exist.

The same principle applies here. The principles of economics are universal. Here, we have an action -- not buying cocoa from the Ivory Coast -- that isn't optimally efficient, but that some businessmen might decide to do anyway. The efficient course would be buying the best possible cocoa for the lowest possible price. If some businessmen choose not to do that, then other businessmen will simply step in and buy it anyway.

In other words, even if people are free to do what we might see as a bad thing, because that bad thing is not optimally efficient, the market will undo the bad thing and go back to efficiency. Likewise, even if people are free to do something a few excited crusaders might see as a good thing, because that "good" thing is not optimally efficient, the market will undo the good thing and go back to efficiency.

Whether you see the thing as good or bad makes no real difference. Maybe you see racism as a great thing and bemoan the fact that blacks are getting any jobs at white businesses. Doesn't matter. Unfortunately for you and your preferences, the market will still see the extra underpaid black labor laying around and pick it up and use it. Likewise, you may think that it's great to not buy cocoa from some country you know nothing about because you've become convinced that bad things are happening there, but the market is going to see all that extra under-priced cocoa laying around and pick it up and use it.

That's just how the market works. Like it or not.

[GunnyFreedom]

Yes ladies and gentlemen you read that right, because I oppose slavery, I do not comprehend the free market.

The free-market neither requires nor produces chattel slavery. Any market involving chattel slavery, is not free. A free market, by definition, requires voluntary and consensual interactions. Including LABOR. Slavery is neither voluntary nor consensual. Slavery is wholly incompatible with a free market, and supporting and defending free markets requires opposing slavery.

It is not me who fails to understand free market economics, but Helmuth. The first requirement of a free market, is freedom.

[helmuth_hubener]

So, am I to take it that you did not accept my apology, Gunny, and are choosing instead to have an over-the-top conniption fit and hold a grudge? Could you answer one way or the other? I mean, I know us shame-inducing, slavery-advocating, inhuman, lowest of the low, horrific, selfish beings don't deserve to be spoken to as if we are human (obviously we're not), but maybe just for the record?

Also, again just to correct some inaccuracies:

"Helmuth says I do not comprehend the free market"

Actually, I did not say that, nor do I think that.

"He started out by claiming I was factually wrong"

Actually, I never claimed that. I never wrote any such thing. Please provide the quote of where I started out by claiming you are factually wrong. If you will take the time to actually look for such a quote, you will find that it does not exist, and then maybe you will realize it was all in your imagination and your hyper-defensiveness hyper-sensitivity was an unwarranted over-reaction. No hard feelings. We all do it sometimes.

I am simply highly skeptical that we have all the relevant information as to this alleged Ivory Coast slavery. Based on oodles of past human rights scandals and crusades, which turn out almost invariably to be over-blown, I harbor serious doubts as to its scope and exact nature. Even if we had all the necessary information, I would remain highly skeptical that we have the necessary wisdom to swoop in and solve all their problems. That is my position. If it's too practical and too ambiguous for you, so be it.

I am very much against slavery. But I am not going to get all hopped up about an overblown crusade against Hershey's and Nestle; a crusade very possibly imagined and whipped up by unscrupulous competitors seeking a niche for themselves.

I agree completely with your explanation that "A free market, by definition, requires voluntary and consensual interactions." That's totally true, of course. The thing to realize is that economics does not just apply to free markets. Economics is universal. The laws of economics were in full operation in classical Greece, 1800s America, and Soviet Russia. They apply today to North Korea. They work as well in deepest Africa. Economics can tell us about how slavery economies will work. It can inform us about trade among prisoners in concentration camps. I believe my analysis is sound, as set forth most clearly in post #234 above. If you believe it is logically flawed, then I enthusiastically welcome you to show me my error(s). I'm serious! Punch holes in my arguments! The reason I am here is largely to discuss and cross-pollinate interesting ideas with interesting people. If you can show me a different way of looking at something, expand my mind, and challenge my views in a rational, high-level way, that would be an extremely valuable service to me.

Anyway, once again I offer you the olive branch of peace and friendship. I wish you all the best, Gunny!

[navy-vet]

I personally am hopeful that helmuth_hubener is right about the Ivory Coast chocolate and that Gunny is mistaken. So far as I can ascertain after having searched the internet, though, there is regretfully, no clear current evidence either way. I have also noticed that neither Hershey nor Nestle has any disclaimers on any of the many products that I have examined since becoming aware of this issue ,which, leads me to suspect that Gunny is still correct in his claims. If this matter of slavery had been resolved or the practice of purchasing slaver product was discontinued, or was even bogus, then surely these two leading chocolatiers would proudly post that on their product labels as well as their websites wouldn't they? Of course they would.

[heavenlyboy34]

I personally am hopeful that helmuth_hubener is right about the Ivory Coast chocolate and that Gunny is mistaken. So far as I can ascertain after having searched the internet, though, there is regretfully, no clear current evidence either way. I have also noticed that neither Hershey nor Nestle has any disclaimers on any of the many products that I have examined since becoming aware of this issue ,which, leads me to suspect that Gunny is still correct in his claims. If this matter of slavery had been resolved or the practice of purchasing slaver product was discontinued, or was even bogus, then surely these two leading chocolatiers would proudly post that on their product labels as well as their websites wouldn't they? Of course they would.

Not necessarily. Companies usually don't do this kind of thing unless there's a real market demand for it. It may not seem like much, but there is cost involved in adding information to a label. The designer has to create it and then add it to the existing template. This may even involve creating custom colors (spot colors)! Then the printer has to adjust the press and various settings accordingly. Perhaps create new plates, depending on the type of press used. Does it need to have fancy embossing, foil, etc? More cost. You get the idea.

[presence]

I will be trying this.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Home...-cocoa-powder/

Do you have a specific method/recipe? That's the first one I found on the 'net.

No specific recipe. Ingredients vary. I don't measure.

Tried and true:

Small cast iron skillet, pad of butter, 1 part cocoa to 1 part sugar, thin splash of half and half (or milk), cap of vanilla extract. Stir vigorously over high heat, moving pan to regulate heat... until the first hint of caramel burn. Less than 10 minutes on a gas cooktop. Spoon to frozen pyrex.


Coconut oil, rice flour, and water make good no dairy substitute.

sometimes expresso, nuts, preserves, mint, pretzles.... increase oil/butter content for "fudgier" adjust sugar/cocao ratio for darker... peanut butter, bananas, strawberries, raisins.... life is like a box of chocolates






....

Personally I find one of the keys to happy marriage is leaving a pan full of chocolate unexpectedly on the stove whenever I get the "oh $#@! its that time of the month" sixth sense. No faster route from most bitched at man in the world, to most loved, than speaking through a hormone defying batch of home made chocolate.

[fr33]

2nd option but very rarely. As I get older, I really don't like sweets the way I used to.