Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would say that your argument reduces actual slavery to nothing more than a bad day at the office.
No, no. We have different type of modern slavery today and also sexual slavery etc. Slavery is not gone, it still exist but mostly in disguise.
There are covernments who keep people with full degrees or even professionals of their own field as free workers in city halls without getting normal paycheck. Happends at so called welfare states. What it really is , it is modern slavery.
Also some workplaces do remind more slavery than appreciated work.
And yes, people talk about slavery, when human value is taken away, rights taken away and person is used without appreciated paycheck, that is slavery.
Sorry for you if you cannot see those peoples agony. Even you would deny it, it is still real.
Vacations taken away from workers = slavery
Few pennies of full work hours = slavery
Instead denying would be better if people would stop it going back to working full hours and getting whipped, it is not far away and there is always those cruel leaders who would be gratefull to get ol cheap days and glory for the few rich master back.
No, no. We have different type of modern slavery today and also sexual slavery etc. Slavery is not gone, it still exist but mostly in disguise.
With the exception of those true cases of modern slavery, i.e., caught in the web of human trafficking and forced sexual exploitation, I will agree. As for your other examples, if you are referring to slavery in the metaphorical sense, fine but state that. If not, I just not going to agree with you.
NO. Today we have a kind of slavery. A woman can divorce her husband, get the house and the kids, and by law force him to earn a living and support his ex-wife and children in a manner that the court decides and he has no choice in the matter. If he doesn't make his payments, he can be sent to jail. And all this can happen through no fault of his own. His wife can just decide she doesn't want to be married to him for any reason.
A woman can divorce her husband, get the house and the kids, and by law force him to earn a living and support his ex-wife and children in a manner that the court decides and he has no choice in the matter. If he doesn't make his payments, he can be sent to jail.
Next time be a stay at home dad and then you get the house and she pays the support.
While it is a commonly help view that capitalism only persist on cheap labor, one must also look at how things are produced to get a better idea of the motivations of capitalist. Back when the USA economy was primarily focused on agriculture, slavery actually would have made good business sense. Paying each farm hand would have been prohibitively expensive, and as a result slave labor insured a 1 time payment to get several decades of work.
However things changed with automation and the industrial revolution. Because now machinary could now produce faster than a human being, it appears that the initial investment was better spent on machinary and not slaves. Slavery had to have been prohibitely expensive compared to automation solutions at the time. Let's look at why slavery probably became expensive...
You had to have slaves who were field hands. But you also had to make sure they were fed (a big expense), clothed (not too expensive, but an expense nontheless) and that they were in good and healthy shake (also expensive). Cradle to the slave enslavement could not have possibly have remained a sustainable model. When compared to technological advancements at the time, slavery basically became obsolete.
With the North pretty much taking the lead in the manufacturing game, they really had no need for slavery at the time either. And the south could not compete with the rampant growth in the North. It's highly doubtful that even withot the civial war, many southern farmers would have just went bankrupt anyway, freeing the slaves anyway.
It is my firm opinion that because America is now at war with capitalism, and most of the people in power does not want capitalism shown in a possible light. But when you think about it, whether you like it or not, capitalism killed slavery in America. We can always give it to the civil war, but we all know America isn't kind enough to just end something that was making money. The reality is probably that there was no money in slavery anymore, and was just officially put out of it's misery.
Would love to debate this.
The best academic work I've seen on this suggests that slavery was still profitable in the 1860s and would have continued to be so until farming became largely mechanized between 1920 and 1940.
Slavery never ended. Slavery as in general principle, not just American type slavery.
Slavery was simply replaced, in some parts of the world, from forced, brute type, to volunteer one, based on paid for labor.
Before you argue this, let me use Gospel example. Remember famous saying - he who is without sin himself, let him cast the first stone? So before you argue, look into the depth of your heart and ask yourself - are you a free person? Can you simply go anywhere you want to, do whatever you want to - without being chained to your source of money? That source being owned by someone else?
I don't remember, who was one of the presidents that said - there is not a bigger slave, than one that believes, he is a free person.
Can you simply go anywhere you want to, do whatever you want to - without being chained to your source of money? That source being owned by someone else?
I don't remember, who was one of the presidents that said - there is not a bigger slave, than one that believes, he is a free person.
Pretty much... millions of people across the globe make those free choices rather regularly.
What you failed to recognize is even if one is "chained" to their source of income, it is a matter of personal choice. A free man may be self-chained out of obligation but still possess the free will to unchain themselves. It is their choice. A slave does not have free-will. They are not chained by their own choosing. Free will is all that a free man need to possess to distinguish himself from a slave.
Haven't read the whole thread, so this point may have already been made. I think technology took a long time to revolutionize farm work, so if the slaves hadn't been freed during the Civil War they would have been freed later for economic reasons.
As long as the slave barons were in charge it didn't matter what was going on in the north or outside of the south. Eugene Genovesse (1930-2012) wrote on the subject in the 60's. Sometimes I like to cherry pick his assumptions on slavery particularly the economics of slavery. He wrote that the south was anti--modern and pre-capitaist. The plantations were not productive at all. What they did do is maintain a social order that the south valued more than productivity and they kept the monetary value of slaves intact. He believed that slavery had to expand to survive and when it couldn't that's what made war inevitable and that's what destroyed the slave system.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
