Can Slavery be Justified?

[Fascist Frederick]

nah, old school slavery

If you have certain groups of humans that are eligible for slavery and others that are not, you have dehumanized them regardless of what you call them. You have one group that's less human than the other humans.

 

[God of Nothing]

If you have certain groups of humans that are eligible for slavery and others that are not, you have dehumanized them regardless of what you call them. You have one group that's less human than the other humans.

Okay, maybe not that far back. Roman-style slavery. People would sell themselves into it to get out of debt and be taken care of in return for labor.

 

[Ultrapenguin]

That's why it's so convenient how when you're strong enough to enslave other people, you don't need justifications. You just do it.

Also why is prison labor obviously morally justified? Because they're paying off the price of their imprisonment? That's more economic than moral.

Is it moral because if someone gets sent to prison then it's ok to just do whatever the fuck you want to them with no guidelines or restrictions? Or because the idea of some other entity profiting off me getting stabbed is supposed to be appealing? Doesn't seem too obvious to me that it's justified exclusively by its very nature, unless the labor is in service of reparations to victims or rehabilitation then it isn't justified.

Plus if you're going to tell people "Well this is obviously moral and anyone who disagrees must be either a lefty or a shut in" then why even bother pretending this is a rational pursuit and not just ego masturbation?

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Okay, maybe not that far back. Roman-style slavery. People would sell themselves into it to get out of debt and be taken care of in return for labor.

Sounds more like a job and less like slavery then.

 

[God of Nothing]

Sounds more like a job and less like slavery then.

Well, you weren't really paid. You were just taken care of as much as your master wanted to. Legally, you weren't considered a person though. Your master could abuse you depending on the era and laws of the time. Rather complex as far as slavery goes.

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Legally, you weren't considered a person though.

So we've come full circle have we? That's what I meant by dehumanization.

 

[SwanSwanson]

The only people who can say this are those who believe they will never be enslaved.

 

[I (Don't) Have A Gun]

Prison labour is not slavery so long as it is voluntary and some form of compensation is received. Based on the nature and form of the compensation it can be exploitative but not slavery.
The key to it is the voluntary part, slavery is by definition involuntary. We tend (although not always in the case of court mandated) refer to voluntarily entering unpaid labour as being indentured labour, so strictly speaking compensation is not necessary, since by that measure voluntary work would be slavery. Although I don't imagine people would call volunteering to work at the soup kitchen "indentured labour", so might need to give that a bit more of a think.

the main argument against prison labor is that it financially motivates interested parties to use prisons to maintain a uniquely cheap work force

I would imagine it would be the liberal argument that you're infringe on someone else's liberty. Granted the very concept of imprisonment infringes on a number of liberties, but that tends to take the form of "you may not X", so someone who is locked up may no longer freely move about, freely communicate, etc. Now I probably need to give it a bit more of a think as to if "you will do X" is worse than "you will not do X" but on a personal level I prefer laws and regulations that offer be the most freedom, so I tend to view prescriptive as offering me the less freedom so I view those as the less desirable.

Slavery is unsustainable for several reasons. For one, the overhead associated with maintaining human livestock is quite massive. Also, if for some reason you decide to end your slavery system, you will be stuck with an orc subrace who have no culture of their own and cannot organically cultivate any sense of community, and you will still be maintaining them indirectly for centuries. So the only winning play with slavery is not to enslave anyone.

The Arabs had a solution to at least one of those issues: mass castration.


A lot of sub-Saharan slaves also went to the Middle East and Arab majority areas of Africa, roughly the same numbers that went north America, but we didn't see a lot of BLM riots in Saudi Arabia did we? Because they would castrate their black slaves and so there decedents wasn't an issue.
It's not a humane solution, but it is an effective one.

It doesn't need any moral justifications because it's a common occurrence to this very day, when one group is much more powerful than another and projects its power, it tends to enslave the opponents and profit off their labor.

This is probably more exploitation and slavery, although I guess slavery is pretty exploitative... maybe a better way to phrase it is so say slavery is exploitation but not all exploitation is slavery.

Prison labor I don't really think can be justified

Anything can be justified although it's a separate discussion as to how well or poorly that justifications stands up to scrutiny.

But I acknowledge them as a human being I own with their own thoughts and feelings.

The problem is that most people by definition view "human" and "property" as separate things. The modern conception does not allow a human to be owned as property but still be humanized as ownership is inherently dominating and a human is viewed as a thing with free will.

If you have certain groups of humans that are eligible for slavery and others that are not, you have dehumanized them regardless of what you call them. You have one group that's less human than the other humans.

Only if you assume all human are equal or at least deserving of equal treatment, rights, privileges etc. Which we in the modern day do.
I think what's missing (or rather what is being taken for granted) is the concept of 'human' and 'dehumanising'. What does it mean to be human as apposed to property, and what does it mean to dehumanise.

Okay, maybe not that far back. Roman-style slavery. People would sell themselves into it to get out of debt and be taken care of in return for labor.

That would be indentured labour. We have a separate term for it because although it has a lot of similarity with slavery it's not exactly slavery.

Also why is prison labor obviously morally justified? Because they're paying off the price of their imprisonment? That's not moral, that's economic.

That's a fun and somewhat frustrating part of a lot of the posts here. People make the assumption that their perspective is understood by others and so take it for granted that when they say something like "it's morally justified" others will already know what is meant by that. Now I can't claim to know either wat is meant, but I assume the general justification is something along the lines of "paying back society" so you are doing free work to offset the trouble you have caused previously or "as punishment" basically making you do laborious or undesirable work to punish you for your crimes.

 

[Stoneheart]

Lincoln should be the mascot of PETA, he free the animals just like they want to....

 

[Johan Schmidt]

Yes, depending on what particular ideology you hold to.

 

[Hongourable Madisha]

Even if prison slavery can be justified (eg sentencing someone to hard labour when they're a total bastard, say a paedo or serial rapist or something), the problem is that it drives wages down for everyone else. If you can get a chain gang of nonces to do a job for you, why pay proper wages? Even if the workers unionise to demand better pay, you have a ready-made pool of scabs ready to break any strikes and replace them. It only works in the context of a planned economy that can weather shocks and there isn't an economic need to traffick in or wrongfully imprison more slaves. Though then you need things like protectionism to stop bosses in other countries trying to outsource their work to your slaves, because then their governments won't be happy with you and might sanction or invade or send in the glowies or whatever else. It could work but there's a lot of other things to consider that it affects.

Non-serious answer: yes it's justified because we got a cool football World Cup stadium out of it

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Even if prison slavery can be justified (eg sentencing someone to hard labour when they're a total bastard, say a paedo or serial rapist or something), the problem is that it drives wages down for everyone else. If you can get a chain gang of nonces to do a job for you, why pay proper wages? Even if the workers unionise to demand better pay, you have a ready-made pool of scabs ready to break any strikes and replace them. It only works in the context of a planned economy that can weather shocks and there isn't an economic need to traffick in or wrongfully imprison more slaves. Though then you need things like protectionism to stop bosses in other countries trying to outsource their work to your slaves, because then their governments won't be happy with you and might sanction or invade or send in the glowies or whatever else. It could work but there's a lot of other things to consider that it affects.

I think it's justified, maybe even good, if the government for some reason has to devote its money to other concerns than subsidizing job creation in a sector where prison labor makes sense. For instance, if building a road over some mountain in Appalachia would make 10 jobs for the same price as funding 100 jobs building wind turbines in Montana, but prison labor would make it feasible, then rounding up some methheads in the local prison might be effective and beneficial. I still don't know if paying them 1/10 of minimum wage is good.

Maybe also a few very dangerous jobs like uranium mining/processing too, since uranium is a strategic resource (needed for energy, powering warships and spacecraft, weapons etc.) but the price isn't always high to make it profitable so prisoners could be used to cut costs.

 

[Wormy]

I think it's justified, maybe even good, if the government for some reason has to devote its money to other concerns than subsidizing job creation in a sector where prison labor makes sense. For instance, if building a road over some mountain in Appalachia would make 10 jobs for the same price as funding 100 jobs building wind turbines in Montana, but prison labor would make it feasible, then rounding up some methheads in the local prison might be effective and beneficial. I still don't know if paying them 1/10 of minimum wage is good.

Maybe also a few very dangerous jobs like uranium mining/processing too, since uranium is a strategic resource (needed for energy, powering warships and spacecraft, weapons etc.) but the price isn't always high to make it profitable so prisoners could be used to cut costs.

You do realize that under your system, your own pedophile ass would be one of the people lowered into the mineshaft, right?

 

[Flavius Claudius Julianus]

Niggers have proven repeatedly that their free status amongst white nations has resulted in a net negative for its citizenry. If we're talking the enslavement of niggers, specifically, in white countries, I'd say its justifiable based upon nothing more than the reduction of crime, rapes, murders, and general niggery in aggregate.

Outside of these specifics? The usual moral arguments apply.

 

[PipTheAlchemist]

Niggers have proven repeatedly that their free status amongst white nations has resulted in a net negative for its citizenry. If we're talking the enslavement of niggers, specifically, in white countries, I'd say its justifiable based upon nothing more than the reduction of crime, rapes, murders, and general niggery in aggregate.

Outside of these specifics? The usual moral arguments apply.

But what if I want my slave to be a cute blond-haired femboy instead of some ugly gorilla-looking retard?

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I think it's justified, maybe even good, if the government for some reason has to devote its money to other concerns than subsidizing job creation in a sector where prison labor makes sense. For instance, if building a road over some mountain in Appalachia would make 10 jobs for the same price as funding 100 jobs building wind turbines in Montana, but prison labor would make it feasible, then rounding up some methheads in the local prison might be effective and beneficial. I still don't know if paying them 1/10 of minimum wage is good.

Maybe also a few very dangerous jobs like uranium mining/processing too, since uranium is a strategic resource (needed for energy, powering warships and spacecraft, weapons etc.) but the price isn't always high to make it profitable so prisoners could be used to cut costs.

I have an idea, probably overly enthusiastic, for prisons being turned into nicer places, like Scandinavian dormitories, but having compulsory work and compulsory vocational training. I don't think it's wrong for prisoners to have good food and luxuries like TV and all that, but they should be obligated to do socially useful work, even if it's just on something like an assembly line.

For executions, nothing beats good old hangings and firing squads, but also an option (such as for heinous crimes) would be working to death.

If slavery was legal every incel could have a high yaller quadroon fancy from New Orleans.

 

[TexasRanger]

Slavery is actually still legal in the US.

Proof-the 13th amendment

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Slavery is still aok with regards to inmates. This leads to people being released from prison after decades with $50 in their pocket as slaves do not earn anything. I did some research and found out that there are countries, such as Poland (national-conservative government!) that think it would be against the human dignity of an incarcerated person not to be paid at least minimal wage for their work. Prisoners also have to work. Which keeps them occupied, they acquire valuable, sought-after job skills and often already have a job waiting for them at the time of their release.

I think we should copy-paste Polish policy here. Why make it even harder for people to return to society?

BTW, not a leftist, but a pro-life (from conception to natural death), pro-gun, pro-police, pro-nation conservative.

For executions, nothing beats good old hangings and firing squads, but also an option (such as for heinous crimes) would be working to death.

The Germans had that "program", it was called "Vernichtung durch Arbeit" (annihilation through work). In that case you should at least credit them for this "brilliant" idea.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

The Germans had that "program", it was called "Vernichtung durch Arbeit" (annihilation through work). In that case you should at least credit them for this "brilliant" idea.

Well BRO, the German's idea is just a rip-off of ancient "mine silver in the silver mine until you die of exhaustion" and "row the galley until you die of exhaustion."

 

[NevskyProspekt]

All human beings are created in God's Image, and it is an affront to human dignity for one human to hold another human being as property in a way no different than livestock. You cannot own the Image of God.

 

[Undercover Commissioner]

Let me play devils advocate:
I say slavery is both natural and good.
Slavery is a fixture of human society, be it "clients" in ancient Rome, serfs in the middle ages, negros on a plantation, the levée en masse, permanent employment (Shūshin koyō) in Japan, the wagie cagie or as op mentioned prison labor. The name and its form may change but the institution itself will never truly disappear . Just as there will always be some people with more power, more status, more wealth, more authority, more intelligence, more zeal and grit than others, there will always be those that are weak, poor, lazy and stupid. To me it appears self evident that many of these men are what Aristotle called natural slaves. I challenge you to look at Skid Row in LA ( or any "bad neighborhood" in a big city), look at the masses of homeless and drug addicts (both white and black). These man are free and emancipated are they not? Yet where has freedom and emancipation led them? Clearly the choices they made let them to live like zombies. These people are simply not fit to live free, they are not fit to rule themselves and obviously they are not fit to live on their own. These people are not and can not be independent, they are dependents.
What they need is not donations, not drugs or a dime, what they need is a master, someone they can depend on, someone that will put their lives in order and turn them from parasitic zombies into productive and contributing members of society, yes they need someone to liberate them from their freedom and rights! What this society needs is not less but more slavery! Slavery is the best tool to turn the destitute into functional humans. The reason prison labor is so dysfunctional, bad and corrupt is not because slavery is bad, but because that is simply the state of the government.

Now I read many comments such as these

Slavery destroyed the Roman Empire because it was more profitable to run big plantation farms and exempt yourself from direct taxes and your slaves from military service than contribute to the state. [...]

HURR DURR SLAVERY BAD FOR ECONOMY HURR DURR WAGES GO DOWN

DO YOU HAVE NO PITY!! A persons live and the health of a society is not measured in fucking dollars or number on the stock exchange! Slavery is a noble tool to uplift and rehabilitate dysfunctional members of society and give them purpose, to stop them from turning to crime and degeneracy. It is a force of order that stabilizes a nation.
It is appalling how many of you judge the merits of slavery based on "finance" and "economics", a very jewish way to view slavery.

All human beings are created in God's Image, and it is an affront to human dignity for one human to hold another human being as property in a way no different than livestock. You cannot own the Image of God.

How shameless can a man be to write this junk? Human dignity?
What dignity is there in a white man starving for years in a tent surrounded by rats and shit, just to overdose on drugs and die on the streets! Where is the dignity in that? If he had an owner, a master he would sleep in a house, be well fed and be of healthy body and mind. Also you cannot own the Image of God!? Are you a muslim? Then why don't you call him Allah? If not why don't you print out an Image of Christ so you can feel the joy of owning an image of god. Or perhaps you should become a slave yourself, is that not what Christ teaches in
matthew 20: 20-28 ?

​