FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Which year was slavery finally legally abolished in the U.S.A?
Which year was slavery finally legally abolished in the U.S.A?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Shocking but true!
No Googling now..which year would peops say that slavery (following Lincoln's 13th amendment) was finally, legally abolished in the U.S.A? I was shocked when i discovered it.
Yes, it IS a mere legal technicality, but without it, Lincoln's bill was not finished, it's not like black folks were found working without pay on a farm somewhere in the South. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?"
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon. "
I'm confused - I got bored and Googled... I'm really confused now... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon. "
But peons were banned in 66. Apologies were made in 2000s, are you thinking of that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon.
I'm confused - I got bored and Googled... I'm really confused now..."
Haha..its tricky to find anyway through Google.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon.
But peons were banned in 66. Apologies were made in 2000s, are you thinking of that?"
nope... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon.
But peons were banned in 66. Apologies were made in 2000s, are you thinking of that?
nope..."
I'm not sure you're right tbh. It's either 1966 or a century before. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery. "
Not that either..U.S.A. only. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only. "
Are you talking federal or state law? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only.
Are you talking federal or state law?"
If state law, then perhaps the Mississippi thing, but federally '66. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Without Googling?
1920-something?
Finally repealed in the 60s?
Give us a clue?
No dude, Civil Rights movement in the 60s had nothing to do with it.. past that is only clue..only because it
will be fascinating to see what peops reckon.
But peons were banned in 66. Apologies were made in 2000s, are you thinking of that?
nope...
I'm not sure you're right tbh. It's either 1966 or a century before. "
I'm 100% right. After 1966.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only.
Are you talking federal or state law?
If state law, then perhaps the Mississippi thing, but federally '66. "
you are on the right track Mississippi wise.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only.
Are you talking federal or state law?
If state law, then perhaps the Mississippi thing, but federally '66.
you are on the right track Mississippi wise.."
Right, so you think 2013. However it was truly 1865 for that amendment, or 1966 for peonage. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only.
Are you talking federal or state law?"
I would say both tbh.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I would have thought the mid 1860's, was it not the 13th amendment ?
Although I imagine there might have been clauses which allowed slavery to continue (but by a different name) under specified conditions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only.
Are you talking federal or state law?
I would say both tbh.."
Federal paws take priority. It wasn't legal in 2013 to have a slave in Mississipi even tho that form wasn't signed.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ilberryMan
over a year ago
Scarborough |
I was shocked a few weeks ago, watching the tv, how many rednecks are still actively in the KKK, and at the time of the flooding of New Orleans how nobody was much bothered? Then Trump wanting to cleanse and build a wall against Mexico?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the USA I'd say 2002
In the UK it was in he late 90s i think.
Interesting fact Lincoln wasn't against slavery he only did it for the army"
In the UK it was 1832 iirc, that might be completely wrong as I'm just trying to remember it from history lessons years ago haha |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There were a thing a few years ago, but I think it related to the UK, where the law were changed so it were illegal to buy and people people, but that were only 2009-2010 not sure it related directly to slavery.
Not that either..U.S.A. only.
Are you talking federal or state law?
If state law, then perhaps the Mississippi thing, but federally '66.
you are on the right track Mississippi wise..
Right, so you think 2013. However it was truly 1865 for that amendment, or 1966 for peonage."
That didn't take long..This lady is the winner!
Yes, February 7th 2013! Mississippi were forced yo certify their ratification of the 13th Amendment. Amazing. But hardly surprising for Mississippi.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"In the USA I'd say 2002
In the UK it was in he late 90s i think.
Interesting fact Lincoln wasn't against slavery he only did it for the army"
Yes, he WAS a Republican! Haha. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was shocked a few weeks ago, watching the tv, how many rednecks are still actively in the KKK, and at the time of the flooding of New Orleans how nobody was much bothered? Then Trump wanting to cleanse and build a wall against Mexico? "
Those KKK members are always a particular demographic, aren't they? People who feel wronged or left behind by their peers lash out in peculiar ways. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the USA I'd say 2002
In the UK it was in he late 90s i think.
Interesting fact Lincoln wasn't against slavery he only did it for the army
Yes, he WAS a Republican! Haha. "
This is a slight misnomer. Abe was always "against" slavery (indeed The Republican Party was the anti-slavery party), just pragmatic in terms of how and when to abolish it. The eventual cry of freedom was brought about more to further war aims during the civil war rather than a sudden conversion to the abolitionist cause. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So now the date has been sorted, what are your views of the confederate flag, the land of Dixie;
should the flag still be flown, many in the South live by that flag and when you travel through the states you see it proudly flying
The Confederate flag was first adopted as a battle flag by the army of Northern Virginia. It was never officially adopted as representing the Confederate States of America (CSA) – also known as the Confederacy – but came to be known as a symbol of the American South.
Despite the defeat of the CSA, the Confederate flag - also known as the rebel flag, the battle flag, the Dixie flag, and Southern cross - continued to be flown. In the Second World War, Southern military units flew the flag.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There were Slaves at the Royal Coronation attending to some of our Arsb allies. It would be foolish to think slavery doesn't exist in most nations in some shape or form. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the USA I'd say 2002
In the UK it was in he late 90s i think.
Interesting fact Lincoln wasn't against slavery he only did it for the army
Yes, he WAS a Republican! Haha.
This is a slight misnomer. Abe was always "against" slavery (indeed The Republican Party was the anti-slavery party), just pragmatic in terms of how and when to abolish it. The eventual cry of freedom was brought about more to further war aims during the civil war rather than a sudden conversion to the abolitionist cause."
Ok then I did hear different but might be get facts mixed up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So now the date has been sorted, what are your views of the confederate flag, the land of Dixie;
should the flag still be flown, many in the South live by that flag and when you travel through the states you see it proudly flying
The Confederate flag was first adopted as a battle flag by the army of Northern Virginia. It was never officially adopted as representing the Confederate States of America (CSA) – also known as the Confederacy – but came to be known as a symbol of the American South.
Despite the defeat of the CSA, the Confederate flag - also known as the rebel flag, the battle flag, the Dixie flag, and Southern cross - continued to be flown. In the Second World War, Southern military units flew the flag.
"
In my opinion what harm is it doing but look at the saint Georges flag where I lived at the time we where ordered to take them down during a world cup |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm from Boston, been on this side of the pond for about 18 years, doing the 90 day dance.
They still have slavery - they just use different names and more clever techniques. It's like a Matrix of Slavery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The Rebel Flag? It goes deep. Might need to be from the USA and at least semi-conscious to understand.
From Patrick Sky not too long ago...
Oh Viet Nam's the kind of sham
That Nixon gets his kicks on
And capitol hill is the kind of pill
That the peoples can get sicks on
I'd like to screw Spiro Agnew
With a dildo made of brass on
The presidents flag is the kind of rag
That a sane man wipes his ass on
Yes white and black is the kind of hack
That Wallace gets his kicks on
For what I mean they should quarantine
States below the Mason-Dixon
And I'd like to pee on Robert E. Lee
With his goddamn great black brass on
For the rebel flag is a filthy rag
That a Yankee wipes his ass on |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Shocking but true!
No Googling now..which year would peops say that slavery (following Lincoln's 13th amendment) was finally, legally abolished in the U.S.A? I was shocked when i discovered it.
Yes, it IS a mere legal technicality, but without it, Lincoln's bill was not finished, it's not like black folks were found working without pay on a farm somewhere in the South. "
2013?
Cal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Shocking but true!
No Googling now..which year would peops say that slavery (following Lincoln's 13th amendment) was finally, legally abolished in the U.S.A? I was shocked when i discovered it.
Yes, it IS a mere legal technicality, but without it, Lincoln's bill was not finished, it's not like black folks were found working without pay on a farm somewhere in the South.
2013?
Cal"
Well no! They are Mexican & South Americans. Far cheaper.
Trump isn't serious about a giant wall on the Mexican border. They all talk shit in election years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Taken from wiki, a slight tangent to OPs original comment
In 1772, Lord Mansfield's judgement in the Somersett's Case emancipated a slave in England, which helped launch the movement to abolish slavery.[1] The case ruled that slavery was unsupported by law in England and no authority could be exercised on slaves entering English or Scottish soil.
The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (citation 3 & 4 Will. IV c. 73) was an 1833 Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom abolishing slavery throughout the British Empire (with the exceptions "of the Territories in the Possession of the East India Company," the "Island of Ceylon," and "the Island of Saint Helena"; the exceptions were eliminated in 1843). The Act was repealed in 1998 as part of a wider rationalization of English statute law, but later anti-slavery legislation remains in force. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Shocking but true!
No Googling now..which year would peops say that slavery (following Lincoln's 13th amendment) was finally, legally abolished in the U.S.A? I was shocked when i discovered it.
Yes, it IS a mere legal technicality, but without it, Lincoln's bill was not finished, it's not like black folks were found working without pay on a farm somewhere in the South.
2013?
Cal"
Yes, February 7 2013. Finally legal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Taken from wiki, a slight tangent to OPs original comment
In 1772, Lord Mansfield's judgement in the Somersett's Case emancipated a slave in England, which helped launch the movement to abolish slavery.[1] The case ruled that slavery was unsupported by law in England and no authority could be exercised on slaves entering English or Scottish soil.
The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (citation 3 & 4 Will. IV c. 73) was an 1833 Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom abolishing slavery throughout the British Empire (with the exceptions "of the Territories in the Possession of the East India Company," the "Island of Ceylon," and "the Island of Saint Helena"; the exceptions were eliminated in 1843). The Act was repealed in 1998 as part of a wider rationalization of English statute law, but later anti-slavery legislation remains in force."
Further, following William Wilberforce's successful campaign that led to the Slavery Abolition Act, the UK government concluded treaties with Sweden, France, Spain and the Netherlands to suppress the trade.
The Royal Navy was used to take slaving ships off the seas and declared that ships transporting slaves were the same as pirates.
Between 1808 and 1860 they seized approximately 1,600 slave ships and freed 150,000 Africans who were aboard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Africa
In the 1850s, the British government halted the Brazilian slave trade, buying out the slavers in that country by Act of Parliament.
I'm not saying the UK had an unblemished record nor that Britain wasn't complicit in many ways, but the role of the UK Abolitionists is often overlooked by revisionist history.
Here endeth the lesson. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Taken from wiki, a slight tangent to OPs original comment
In 1772, Lord Mansfield's judgement in the Somersett's Case emancipated a slave in England, which helped launch the movement to abolish slavery.[1] The case ruled that slavery was unsupported by law in England and no authority could be exercised on slaves entering English or Scottish soil.
The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (citation 3 & 4 Will. IV c. 73) was an 1833 Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom abolishing slavery throughout the British Empire (with the exceptions "of the Territories in the Possession of the East India Company," the "Island of Ceylon," and "the Island of Saint Helena"; the exceptions were eliminated in 1843). The Act was repealed in 1998 as part of a wider rationalization of English statute law, but later anti-slavery legislation remains in force.
Further, following William Wilberforce's successful campaign that led to the Slavery Abolition Act, the UK government concluded treaties with Sweden, France, Spain and the Netherlands to suppress the trade.
The Royal Navy was used to take slaving ships off the seas and declared that ships transporting slaves were the same as pirates.
Between 1808 and 1860 they seized approximately 1,600 slave ships and freed 150,000 Africans who were aboard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Africa
In the 1850s, the British government halted the Brazilian slave trade, buying out the slavers in that country by Act of Parliament.
I'm not saying the UK had an unblemished record nor that Britain wasn't complicit in many ways, but the role of the UK Abolitionists is often overlooked by revisionist history.
Here endeth the lesson. "
.
In 1800(most of the northern states had already abolished slavery) Jefferson fought a war with the Barbary coast because he refused to pay tribute for Americans taken as slaves.
Between 1700 and 1800 the Barbary coast enslaved over a million white European sailors!.
Slavery has never been a particularly "white" thing to do, we just tended to be more efficient with it!.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Slavery was the ability to get cheap energy!.
Before the advent of the stream engine, coal mines had an extremely poor return, you put nearly as much energy (man power) in as you got out in coal.
Having a machine that pumped out millions of gallons of water for a few tonnes of coal increased its efficiency to such an extent that you no longer needed slavery.
.
To give you an idea, one barrel of crude oil in the middle East would cost about 2 dollars to extract and about 6 dollars to refine.
But it contains about 12,000 man hours of energy.
So for ten dollars you get the equivalent of 300 workers working a 40 hour week.
I mean 300 people working flat out for 8 hours a day for a whole week for ten dollars!!!.
Who needs slaves??.
The entire wealth of the world today is based upon high energy returns 1 man hour in 180 man hours out, it's the something for nothing philosophy.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Slavery was the ability to get cheap energy!.
Before the advent of the stream engine, coal mines had an extremely poor return, you put nearly as much energy (man power) in as you got out in coal.
Having a machine that pumped out millions of gallons of water for a few tonnes of coal increased its efficiency to such an extent that you no longer needed slavery.
.
To give you an idea, one barrel of crude oil in the middle East would cost about 2 dollars to extract and about 6 dollars to refine.
But it contains about 12,000 man hours of energy.
So for ten dollars you get the equivalent of 300 workers working a 40 hour week.
I mean 300 people working flat out for 8 hours a day for a whole week for ten dollars!!!.
Who needs slaves??.
The entire wealth of the world today is based upon high energy returns 1 man hour in 180 man hours out, it's the something for nothing philosophy.
"
Hebce why most modern slavery (outside of sexual) is things like maids or house staff something you csnt really automate atm |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
First, it's important to note the different between federal and state law in the US.
Second, slavery/involuntary servitude still isn't completely abolished in the US - the 13th amendment, which abolishes slavery, makes an explicit exception for convicted criminals. So, at least in this sense, slavery is still legal there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Slavery was the ability to get cheap energy!.
Before the advent of the stream engine, coal mines had an extremely poor return, you put nearly as much energy (man power) in as you got out in coal.
Having a machine that pumped out millions of gallons of water for a few tonnes of coal increased its efficiency to such an extent that you no longer needed slavery.
.
To give you an idea, one barrel of crude oil in the middle East would cost about 2 dollars to extract and about 6 dollars to refine.
But it contains about 12,000 man hours of energy.
So for ten dollars you get the equivalent of 300 workers working a 40 hour week.
I mean 300 people working flat out for 8 hours a day for a whole week for ten dollars!!!.
Who needs slaves??.
The entire wealth of the world today is based upon high energy returns 1 man hour in 180 man hours out, it's the something for nothing philosophy.
Hebce why most modern slavery (outside of sexual) is things like maids or house staff something you csnt really automate atm"
.
Something's are intrinsically linked, you put 3 hours of your time into earning money that pays for 3 hours of somebody else's time ... On a 1to1 ratio the whole world stops because in effect you have losses.
So you need 3 hours of your time to be worth 30 hours of the "slaves" time!....28 hours came "free" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"First, it's important to note the different between federal and state law in the US.
Second, slavery/involuntary servitude still isn't completely abolished in the US - the 13th amendment, which abolishes slavery, makes an explicit exception for convicted criminals. So, at least in this sense, slavery is still legal there."
.
The us penal system is modern slavery!.
It's got sections of private interests! Costs paid by taxpayers and private interests in its output.
Ie us car licence plates!.
.
Judge jails black guy for cannabis taking, black guy gets incarcerated at cost to tax payer, black guy makes licence plates in incarceration for 50c an hour, private company makes profit on plates.
Energy paid by tax payers.
Product of energy sold for profit by private corporation |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"First, it's important to note the different between federal and state law in the US.
Second, slavery/involuntary servitude still isn't completely abolished in the US - the 13th amendment, which abolishes slavery, makes an explicit exception for convicted criminals. So, at least in this sense, slavery is still legal there..
The us penal system is modern slavery!.
It's got sections of private interests! Costs paid by taxpayers and private interests in its output.
Ie us car licence plates!.
.
Judge jails black guy for cannabis taking, black guy gets incarcerated at cost to tax payer, black guy makes licence plates in incarceration for 50c an hour, private company makes profit on plates.
Energy paid by tax payers.
Product of energy sold for profit by private corporation "
I'm not proud of it. Its shameful. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"First, it's important to note the different between federal and state law in the US.
Second, slavery/involuntary servitude still isn't completely abolished in the US - the 13th amendment, which abolishes slavery, makes an explicit exception for convicted criminals. So, at least in this sense, slavery is still legal there..
The us penal system is modern slavery!.
It's got sections of private interests! Costs paid by taxpayers and private interests in its output.
Ie us car licence plates!.
.
Judge jails black guy for cannabis taking, black guy gets incarcerated at cost to tax payer, black guy makes licence plates in incarceration for 50c an hour, private company makes profit on plates.
Energy paid by tax payers.
Product of energy sold for profit by private corporation
I'm not proud of it. Its shameful. "
vote Hillary she'll fix all that  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I haven't read the whole thread so this might already have been mentioned but apparently there are more slaves in the world now than ever before. Over 20 million is the figure I saw. Mostly due to crime. Things like the illegal sex trade and things like that.
For the rest of us, arguably slavery is still here but in a different form. We're now 'wage slaves' or 'debt slaves'. Or in other words, in the past, the slave owners had to house and feed the slaves but now we house and feed ourselves.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I haven't read the whole thread so this might already have been mentioned but apparently there are more slaves in the world now than ever before. Over 20 million is the figure I saw. Mostly due to crime. Things like the illegal sex trade and things like that.
For the rest of us, arguably slavery is still here but in a different form. We're now 'wage slaves' or 'debt slaves'. Or in other words, in the past, the slave owners had to house and feed the slaves but now we house and feed ourselves.."
.
You've always had to sustain them!.
You want a return on your principle?... So you had to buy one, train one, that's expenditure, so you want to keep the slave alive, that means, you've got to sustain them, food, housing, medicine...
In the energy business they call it EROEI Energy Returned On Energy Invested... The higher the eroei the better the profit or return on investment.
Hence why 300 years ago most slave owners selectively breed slaves.. You get a better eroei!.
It absolutely still goes on today, we just disguise it better and to an extent technology replaced man power, no slave will ever get a better return than a jcb untill oil gets very very hard to extract!.
You could argue that most of the third world exists on slave wages, ie they get paid just enough to exist but you could also argue a large % of the west also fall into that category, it's just there existence is slightly more luxurious.
Capitalism runs on returns on investment, how you get those returns is a moral question
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There are a number of equations that deal with return on nvestment but stripped to its core it is interest earned on investment. This was banned in medieval times as usery by both the christian religion and Islam, it is still not permitted by Islam. However in medieval times both religions still had slaves then as it was not banned under either religion.
Slavery then, as it is today is about power. Whether it is wage slavery or physical bondage religion gives it validity.
My mother watches EWTN the Catholic channel and l watches it once when they had a person on the show who ran a religious investment fund. It was run he said in accordance with the bible and the ten commandments. They did not as an example invest in hotel chains that showed pornography. He was asked about ethical investment and he had no time for such socialiat ideals that were not supported by the bible.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"First, it's important to note the different between federal and state law in the US.
Second, slavery/involuntary servitude still isn't completely abolished in the US - the 13th amendment, which abolishes slavery, makes an explicit exception for convicted criminals. So, at least in this sense, slavery is still legal there."
Yes, true, a clause in the amendment.
Haven't done the math but would not be surprised if 75% of US prison inmates are, and always have been, black! Shame on that clause not being abolished too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Most people have basically worked the land or for a select few throughout time, I cant remember where I read it or who said it, But at some point in time slave owners or the people in power realised that if you keep animals caged up they don't produce the best meat/eggs/milk etc, So they give them more space, (Free range)
We are all just free range people at the end of the day, Given enough space to feel free and produce but kept under control by the select few |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"First, it's important to note the different between federal and state law in the US.
Second, slavery/involuntary servitude still isn't completely abolished in the US - the 13th amendment, which abolishes slavery, makes an explicit exception for convicted criminals. So, at least in this sense, slavery is still legal there.
Yes, true, a clause in the amendment.
Haven't done the math but would not be surprised if 75% of US prison inmates are, and always have been, black! Shame on that clause not being abolished too. "
I'd say tops 50% for black prisoners and 50% for rest |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
