Should Slavery/Indentured Servitude be brought back?

[HUElavia]

No.

People have lives to live, and they need money to be able to support themselves and/or their family. It's 2019, we're past the barbaric act of Slavery.

[Kernen]

Forced labor is less efficient than compensated voluntary labor. The implications of slavery entirely aside (which boggle the mind, btw), it wouldn't actually benefit the economy.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Forced labor is less efficient than compensated voluntary labor. The implications of slavery entirely aside (which boggle the mind, btw), it wouldn't actually benefit the economy.

Ah yes forgot this one, thank you

[Alexandria Eschate]

A little something about taking people out of the free market.

A chunk of the population that just can’t buy consumer goods. Also I remember reading something about the plantations in the south just using slave labor for everything, becoming too self sufficient to really contribute to the local economy

And, on top of that, it stagnates both the society and economy. No incentive to really try to improve things or make things run more efficiently, if you can simply kick back and rely on a steady supply of forced labor to do everything.

[Greater Cesnica]

Oh boy someone said yes to the poll. Time for a crusade.

[Duhon]

I know that this proposal seems

"Seems"? Fucking "seems"?

monstrous

Of course it fucking is!

and a huge step backwards in terms of the progression of history

... and not a word wasted on fucking humans or fucking humanity, just on impersonal nonliving forces that cannot be hurt, yet absolutely must take precedence over, again, fucking humans and fucking humanity, because reasons --

but just hear me out?

-- that I will not set my eyes upon. This is bad, whatever reasons you may have are bad, stop being an evil twisted fuck, salt this thread with the entire fucking Pacific Ocean, because fuck this shit.

[Internationalist Bastard]

A chunk of the population that just can’t buy consumer goods. Also I remember reading something about the plantations in the south just using slave labor for everything, becoming too self sufficient to really contribute to the local economy

And, on top of that, it stagnates both the society and economy. No incentive to really try to improve things or make things run more efficiently, if you can simply kick back and rely on a steady supply of forced labor to do everything.

Why find a more efficient means to produce when you can just buy more slaves

[Bluelight-R006]

I think Sai need some to know of the psychological distress given to the African-American slaves in the 1800s. You really need to think for all humans—it will only benefit some, but for the greater good? Humanity is more civilised, and we have established more morals than we have had back in the days of slavery.

[Kernen]

And, on top of that, it stagnates both the society and economy. No incentive to really try to improve things or make things run more efficiently, if you can simply kick back and rely on a steady supply of forced labor to do everything.

Why find a more efficient means to produce when you can just buy more slaves

Commerce works best when there's, like, commerce. Go figure!

[The Huskar Social Union]

You have an idealised conception of slavery if you think that abuse is unlikely. Your average slave master would not be a combination of personal trainer, social support and confidant. Relatively few may engage in the most heinous kinds of abuse, but a position whereby one individual is granted ownership over another is not particularly well balanced in terms of protecting the wellbeing of the owned party, especially in areas of life behind closed doors without the possibility of outside scrutiny.

Its because he would of course be the slave master in his ideal world, and when he beats his slaves and hurts them its because he cares, but of course he would never go to hurt them in the first place.

He would be the ideal lovable master whose slaves would look up to him.

[Aclion]

Don’t most economists agree slavery actually hurts the economy?

Yes, with slavery your removing the safeguard that helps ensure that the exchange of labor is mutually beneficial, and therefore that the exchange is producing wealth rather then just shifting it from one person to another. It also distorts the entire labor market, causing less labor to be supplied then otherwise would be.

[Kernen]

You have an idealised conception of slavery if you think that abuse is unlikely. Your average slave master would not be a combination of personal trainer, social support and confidant. Relatively few may engage in the most heinous kinds of abuse, but a position whereby one individual is granted ownership over another is not particularly well balanced in terms of protecting the wellbeing of the owned party, especially in areas of life behind closed doors without the possibility of outside scrutiny.

Its because he would of course be the slave master in his ideal world, and when he beats his slaves and hurts them its because he cares, but of course he would never go to hurt them in the first place.

He would be the ideal lovable master whose slaves would look up to him.

Yes, the enslaved always look upon their masters as benevolent. Slaves never resent their owners. *nods*

[Saiwania]

A chunk of the population that just can’t buy consumer goods. Also I remember reading something about the plantations in the south just using slave labor for everything, becoming too self sufficient to really contribute to the local economy

Now this is a good argument as to why I might be in the wrong on this. But arguably, the poorest in our societies don't have much purchasing power anyways. Minimum wage gives enough for just food and some other things, but certainly not enough for rent (without lots of roommates). But in a lot of places, there is a limit on how many people are allowed to rent any one residence or room.

I'd think that the amount of unfree labor relative to free labor wouldn't grow but would remain mostly static. The effect of unfree labor would perhaps mean lower prices for certain goods. But I'd think automation can produce faster and better than any human labor force (paid or unpaid). But not everything can be automated.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Fuck. No.

[Kowani]

A chunk of the population that just can’t buy consumer goods. Also I remember reading something about the plantations in the south just using slave labor for everything, becoming too self sufficient to really contribute to the local economy

Now this is a good argument as to why I might be in the wrong on this. But arguably, the poorest in our societies don't have much purchasing power anyways. Minimum wage gives enough for just food and some other things, but certainly not enough for rent (without lots of roommates). But in a lot of places, there is a limit on how many people are allowed to rent any one residence or room.

I'd think that the amount of unfree labor relative to free labor wouldn't grow but would remain mostly static. The effect of unfree labor would perhaps mean lower prices for certain goods. But I'd think automation can produce faster and better than any human labor force (paid or unpaid). But not everything can be automated.

If your plan was to enslave the poor, automation would outproduce you anyway.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Yes, starting with the Nazis.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Yes, starting with the Nazis.

Saiwania does complete 180

[Kernen]

A chunk of the population that just can’t buy consumer goods. Also I remember reading something about the plantations in the south just using slave labor for everything, becoming too self sufficient to really contribute to the local economy

Now this is a good argument as to why I might be in the wrong on this. But arguably, the poorest in our societies don't have much purchasing power anyways. Minimum wage gives enough for just food and some other things, but certainly not enough for rent (without lots of roommates). But in a lot of places, there is a limit on how many people are allowed to rent any one residence or room.

I'd think that the amount of unfree labor relative to free labor wouldn't grow but would remain mostly static. The effect of unfree labor would perhaps mean lower prices for certain goods. But I'd think automation can produce faster and better than any human labor force (paid or unpaid). But not everything can be automated.

Any purchasing power is more than no purchasing power. And the necessities also contribute to commerce. You're just wrong on this issue.

[Bluelight-R006]

You have an idealised conception of slavery if you think that abuse is unlikely. Your average slave master would not be a combination of personal trainer, social support and confidant. Relatively few may engage in the most heinous kinds of abuse, but a position whereby one individual is granted ownership over another is not particularly well balanced in terms of protecting the wellbeing of the owned party, especially in areas of life behind closed doors without the possibility of outside scrutiny.

Its because he would of course be the slave master in his ideal world, and when he beats his slaves and hurts them its because he cares, but of course he would never go to hurt them in the first place.

He would be the ideal lovable master whose slaves would look up to him.

Exactly. Sai never thinks about who’s going to be affected. As long as it benefits thyself, (s)he is quite fine with it. Like I said, humanity is much more civilised and has established more rules of morality and a decent code of conduct. I doubt slavery will ever be something so big again.

[Saiwania]

Exactly. Sai never thinks about who’s going to be affected. As long as it benefits thyself, (s)he is quite fine with it. Like I said, humanity is much more civilised and has established more rules of morality and a decent code of conduct. I doubt slavery will ever be something so big again.

I did. I said something to the effect that if I were a slave, I'd benefit from free housing and food, etc- but the trade off would be that I have to do whatever work is assigned to me by my owner. I can't guarantee that this lifestyle wouldn't get old over time, but I'm open minded enough to consider that some people might want to sell themselves off on this basis. With indentured servitude, it could be thought of as temporary instead of permanent slavery. In both cases, you don't get paid for any labor done.

[Bluelight-R006]

Exactly. Sai never thinks about who’s going to be affected. As long as it benefits thyself, (s)he is quite fine with it. Like I said, humanity is much more civilised and has established more rules of morality and a decent code of conduct. I doubt slavery will ever be something so big again.

I did. I said something to the effect that if I were a slave, I'd benefit from free housing and food, etc- but the trade off would be that I have to do whatever work is assigned to me by my owner. I can't guarantee that this lifestyle wouldn't get old over time, but I'm open minded enough to consider that some people might want to sell themselves off on this basis. With indentured servitude, it could be thought of as temporary instead of permanent slavery. In both cases, you don't get paid for any labor done.

The fact that you don’t get paid for any labor done is literally affecting the person working. What’s the point if people are forced into slavery with no advantages? Hard labor for nothing is just disgusting and abhorrent to think about, and working for someone? That’s like trapped in an eternal hell, except it’s more clean. But you don’t get to have anything you desire, at least. Just food and housing and total labor is a boring life.

Not to mention, when will people be so kind as a whole to treat their slaves with absolute care and respect?

[The Huskar Social Union]

Exactly. Sai never thinks about who’s going to be affected. As long as it benefits thyself, (s)he is quite fine with it. Like I said, humanity is much more civilised and has established more rules of morality and a decent code of conduct. I doubt slavery will ever be something so big again.

I did. I said something to the effect that if I were a slave, I'd benefit from free housing and food, etc- but the trade off would be that I have to do whatever work is assigned to me by my owner. I can't guarantee that this lifestyle wouldn't get old over time, but I'm open minded enough to consider that some people might want to sell themselves off on this basis. With indentured servitude, it could be thought of as temporary instead of permanent slavery. In both cases, you don't get paid for any labor done.

You will also be subjected to beatings, brandings, emotional and psychological abuse on top of all the physical shit, forced to degrade yourself and hey another thing that can happen to you, is you will be raped. Constantly, any time your owners want to rape you.

And you can do nothing about it without marking yourself for death.

"Lifestyle would get old over time", jesus fucking christ

[The Huskar Social Union]

You really are fucking deluded in your arguments if you think slave owners are gona treat people who they own as property with respect. The vast majority of slave owners in near every society in human history treated their slaves like fucking shit.

[Neutraligon]

Exactly. Sai never thinks about who’s going to be affected. As long as it benefits thyself, (s)he is quite fine with it. Like I said, humanity is much more civilised and has established more rules of morality and a decent code of conduct. I doubt slavery will ever be something so big again.

I did. I said something to the effect that if I were a slave, I'd benefit from free housing and food, etc- but the trade off would be that I have to do whatever work is assigned to me by my owner.

Just break the law in severe enough way to need to go to prison, no need for slavery.

I can't guarantee that this lifestyle wouldn't get old over time

get...old...

, but I'm open minded enough to consider that some people might want to sell themselves off on this basis.

Like I said, just go to jail

With indentured servitude, it could be thought of as temporary instead of permanent slavery. In both cases, you don't get paid for any labor done.

Which means that when you leave you have no means to support yourself since you know having no money means you go right back onto the streets. And that ignores the fact that automation will make most slave redundant.

[Duhon]

You really are fucking deluded in your arguments if you think slave owners are gona treat people who they own as property with respect. The vast majority of slave owners in near every society in human history treated their slaves like fucking shit.

Deluded -- or deliberately obtuse? I deride, you deride a lot more.