I don't believe you

[Habitat]

8 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Habitat

Did you read the link as slave rebellion would seem to be a fairly strong indicator that slavery has at no time been favored by the slaves?

jmccr8

Don't think there's any debate about that, but just about how the wider society regarded it,

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Sherapy

Obviously, the slaves did not share the views of their owners and Walker seems to think that because it was good for the owners that the slaves were quite content to be a part of the system of the day.

I gave this link to Walker to respond to once before and got no response to the material presented and will link it again.

Slave rebellion - Wikipedia

jmccr8

Ive addressed that, and indeed had done so before you provided it.

my point was not that slaves enjoyed being slaves (But indeed some people  voluntarily became slaves to avoid  debt and the results of debt (starvation homelessness and death)  in early societies)

It was that, in many early societies if slavery was not practiced all enemies would be killed including women and children.   Keeping them as slaves  meant they were not a threat, could be controlled and eventually integrated into your society and even freed,  and thus did not have to be executed when defeated  

The transatlantic slave trade was the worst of its kind and basically an exception to the nature of slavery until then. 

Second, only slavery enabled societies like those in Greece and Rome to survive and be prosperous.

If the slaves had been freed, the society would have collapsed, and not only the ex slaves but the free citizens would have starved to  death from a lack of resources and economic production (most of the fit young men/citizens  were in the army trying to protect and defend their counties or expand their territory)  

That is is a simplification, but a true one.  

So, like all things, slavery is ethically allowable when the other options are worse. 

Thus slavery, while hard,  was a better option than death

Plus of course NO ONE had, or was used to, the sort of personal freedoms we enjoy. In many ways slavery was no different to being a working class person, or a serf, or peasant,   and in some ways it was better. As a free peasant or serf you could starve or freeze to death, with your family, in hard times,  but as a slave you were the valuable property of a richer person, who would feed, clothe, and often  even educate you, to improve your value. 

My point was that slavery has never been black and white. Some forms were really terrible; others were really no worse than life for any poor person. 

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, Sherapy said:

That you see slavery as vital and defend it under any circumstance is shocking and concerning, The point of understanding history is not to advocate it’s practices but to learn for them and strive to be better to each other.

 

 

Only because you are ignorant of human history 

but any way, you use the wrong tense.

I don't defend it under ANY circumstances.

I only defend it, where removing it would  have caused far worse conditions for far more people, including both slaves and free.

  I don't defend it in modern western countries, because our socio economic systems are currently so robust that, not only can we do without slaves, we can afford to provide  a social/economic  safety net for all our citizens (Australia does a lot better job of this than America, but that reflects our different social values We don't do quite as well as some Scandinavian countries   )

I don't defend it anywhere in the modern world because the world now has the resources to provide for all humans if the richer countries gave a little more to the poorer ones.

On the other hand, after the zombie Apocalypse or a nuclear winter,  slavery might again be essential for the survival of communities and societies. 

 

 

[Mr Walker]

21 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

How is posting links that counter your position being emotional?

jmccr8

when i posted that i was responding to the emotional attacks of sherapy and jodie 

No your position is not emotional. It is not even wrong, but then i was never arguing against that pov. I agree with it   (in most cases  But remember in ancient states, and as recently  as  in Victorian England, people put themselves  into 'slavery"  to survive, because they  were in debt had no income or possessions,  and could not survive on their own resources, and the state simply let them die in the thousands  

BUT sometimes one moral wrong is required to prevent a greater moral wrong And sometimes we have to do things to survive which, in other circumstances, would be wrong, but when done to survive become right 

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Only because you are ignorant of human history 

but any way, you use the wrong tense.

I don't defend it under ANY circumstances.

I only defend it, where removing it would  have caused far worse conditions for far more people, including both slaves and free.

  I don't defend it in modern western countries, because our socio economic systems are currently so robust that, not only can we do without slaves, we can afford to provide  a social/economic  safety net for all our citizens (Australia does a lot better job of this than America, but that reflects our different social values We don't do quite as well as some Scandinavian countries   )

I don't defend it anywhere in the modern world because the world now has the resources to provide for all humans if the richer countries gave a little more to the poorer ones.

On the other hand, after the zombie Apocalypse or a nuclear winter,  slavery might again be essential for the survival of communities and societies. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Ive addressed that, and indeed had done so before you provided it.

my point was not that slaves enjoyed being slaves (But indeed some people  voluntarily became slaves to avoid  debt and the results of debt (starvation homelessness and death)  in early societies)

It was that, in many early societies if slavery was not practiced all enemies would be killed including women and children.   Keeping them as slaves  meant they were not a threat, could be controlled and eventually integrated into your society and even freed,  and thus did not have to be executed when defeated  

The transatlantic slave trade was the worst of its kind and basically an exception to the nature of slavery until then. 

Second, only slavery enabled societies like those in Greece and Rome to survive and be prosperous.

If the slaves had been freed, the society would have collapsed, and not only the ex slaves but the free citizens would have starved to  death from a lack of resources and economic production (most of the fit young men/citizens  were in the army trying to protect and defend their counties or expand their territory)  

That is is a simplification, but a true one.  

So, like all things, slavery is ethically allowable when the other options are worse. 

Thus slavery, while hard,  was a better option than death

Plus of course NO ONE had, or was used to, the sort of personal freedoms we enjoy. In many ways slavery was no different to being a working class person, or a serf, or peasant,   and in some ways it was better. As a free peasant or serf you could starve or freeze to death, with your family, in hard times,  but as a slave you were the valuable property of a richer person, who would feed, clothe, and often  even educate you, to improve your value. 

My point was that slavery has never been black and white. Some forms were really terrible; others were really no worse than life for any poor person. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Only because you are ignorant of human history 

but any way, you use the wrong tense.

I don't defend it under ANY circumstances.

I only defend it, where removing it would  have caused far worse conditions for far more people, including both slaves and free.

  I don't defend it in modern western countries, because our socio economic systems are currently so robust that, not only can we do without slaves, we can afford to provide  a social/economic  safety net for all our citizens (Australia does a lot better job of this than America, but that reflects our different social values We don't do quite as well as some Scandinavian countries   )

I don't defend it anywhere in the modern world because the world now has the resources to provide for all humans if the richer countries gave a little more to the poorer ones.

On the other hand, after the zombie Apocalypse or a nuclear winter,  slavery might again be essential for the survival of communities and societies. 

 

 

Walker, slavery was horrible, period. 

 

http://www.understandingslavery.com/index.php-option=com_content&view=article&id=418_benin-leopard&catid=143&Itemid=253.html

Edited April 18, 2019 by Sherapy

[+Sherapy]

2 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Sherapy

Obviously, the slaves did not share the views of their owners and Walker seems to think that because it was good for the owners that the slaves were quite content to be a part of the system of the day.

I gave this link to Walker to respond to once before and got no response to the material presented and will link it again.

Slave rebellion - Wikipedia

jmccr8

Of course not, no one in their right mind praises slavery. Sheesh.

[Habitat]

28 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Of course not, no one in their right mind praises slavery. Sheesh.

The virtue signalling Queen of UM !  I don't think Mr Wooker has any slaves shackled in the basement, but you never know !

[Farmer77]

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

BUT sometimes one moral wrong is required to prevent a greater moral wrong And sometimes we have to do things to survive which, in other circumstances, would be wrong, but when done to survive become right 

Nowhere in your justification post however did you actually mention survival. You merely mentioned slavery's value in maintaining a lifestyle.

[+Sherapy]

10 minutes ago, Habitat said:

The virtue signalling Queen of UM !  I don't think Mr Wooker has any slaves shackled in the basement, but you never know !

Do you even read his posts? 

 

[Habitat]

3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Do you even read his posts? 

 

What I read did not approve of slavery.

[+Sherapy]

6 minutes ago, Habitat said:

What I read did not approve of slavery.

He praises slavery. 

“It was that, in many early societies if slavery was not practiced all enemies would be killed including women and children.   Keeping them as slaves  meant they were not a threat, could be controlled and eventually integrated into your society and even freed...” 

“Second, only slavery enabled societies like those in Greece and Rome to survive and be prosperous.”

“Thus slavery, while hard,  was a better option than death” (Walker).

“In many ways slavery was no different to being a working class person, or a serf, or peasant,   and in some ways it was better” ( Walker).

Edited April 18, 2019 by Sherapy

[eight bits]

3 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Obviously, the slaves did not share the views of their owners and Walker seems to think that because it was good for the owners that the slaves were quite content to be a part of the system of the day.

See, that just proves why we need slavery. These people don't know what's good for them, so somebody has to look after their interests. Thank God there have been slave masters throughout history who've stepped up to help their fellow men and women in need.

[Habitat]

Just now, Sherapy said:

“It was that, in many early societies if slavery was not practiced all enemies would be killed including women and children.   Keeping them as slaves  meant they were not a threat, could be controlled and eventually integrated into your society and even freed...” 

“Second, only slavery enabled societies like those in Greece and Rome to survive and be prosperous.”

“Thus slavery, while hard,  was a better option than death” (Walker).

I understand you have a great love of black and white, but there are many shades of grey in slavery, Did you know that until comparatively recent times, sailors who "jumped ship" whilst in port, could be subject to long jail terms ? There are all kinds of tyranny in the world, we are fortunate to be largely free of it where we live, but it does exist elsewhere, Millions work as sweated labour, for a pittance. 

 

 

 

[+Sherapy]

7 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I understand you have a great love of black and white, but there are many shades of grey in slavery, Did you know that until comparatively recent times, sailors who "jumped ship" whilst in port, could be subject to long jail terms ? There are all kinds of tyranny in the world, we are fortunate to be largely free of it where we live, but it does exist elsewhere, Millions work as sweated labour, for a pittance. 

 

 

 

Bandwagon apologist. 

So you help by praising and espousing horrendous atrocities towards humanity, justifying and excusing them?

 

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by Sherapy

[Farmer77]

3 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I understand you have a great love of black and white, but there are many shades of grey in slavery

No there's not. There are shades of grey when it comes to indentured servitude , and there are shades of grey when it comes to penal labor , but there are no shades of grey when it comes to slavery.

 

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

No there's not. There are shades of grey when it comes to indentured servitude , and there are shades of grey when it comes to penal labor , but there are no shades of grey when it comes to slavery.

 

 I don't agree, if you go to jail if you don't work, you are a slave, and that is what happened to people who tried to leave hellish conditions on ships in the past. 

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

 I don't agree, if you go to jail if you don't work, you are a slave, and that is what happened to people who tried to leave hellish conditions on ships in the past. 

Without knowing the particulars, like whether the sailors you are referring to had contracts verbal or otherwise, it sounds like you're describing any modern Navy in the world. Care to elaborate?

[Habitat]

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Without knowing the particulars, like whether the sailors you are referring to had contracts verbal or otherwise, it sounds like you're describing any modern Navy in the world. Care to elaborate?

They might have had contracts, but the working conditions might have been atrocious and unanticipated, and they would attempt to decamp in port, but it seems that around the world in days gone by, but not that far gone by, that this was seen as a threat to the vital arteries of trade, and attracted harsh penalty. I was rather surprised to read an old newspaper archive from the early fifties, where a couple of men were jailed for 18 months for jumping ship to escape intolerable conditions on-board, from a merchant vessel in Brisbane. And they were not aliens. Unimaginable today.

[RoofGardener]

10 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Without knowing the particulars, like whether the sailors you are referring to had contracts verbal or otherwise, it sounds like you're describing any modern Navy in the world. Care to elaborate?

Indeed. 

In addition, it is not technically slavery if you are being paid !

[RoofGardener]

Just now, Habitat said:

They might have had contracts, but the working conditions might have been atrocious and unanticipated, and they would attempt to decamp in port, but it seems that around the world in days gone by, but not that far gone by, that this was seen as a threat to the vital arteries of trade, and attracted harsh penalty. I was rather surprised to read an old newspaper archive from the early fifties, where a couple of men were jailed for 18 months for jumping ship to escape intolerable conditions on-board, from a merchant vessel in Brisbane. And they were not aliens. Unimaginable today.

In which port did this happen ? It sounds like it as a "shithole" country with dodgy laws, to me ? 

[+Sherapy]

3 minutes ago, Habitat said:

They might have had contracts, but the working conditions might have been atrocious and unanticipated, and they would attempt to decamp in port, but it seems that around the world in days gone by, but not that far gone by, that this was seen as a threat to the vital arteries of trade, and attracted harsh penalty. I was rather surprised to read an old newspaper archive from the early fifties, where a couple of men were jailed for 18 months for jumping ship to escape intolerable conditions on-board, from a merchant vessel in Brisbane. And they were not aliens. Unimaginable today.

Do you have a link?

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

In which port did this happen ? It sounds like it as a "shithole" country with dodgy laws, to me ? 

Brisbane, and the sailors may have been Brits, but they were certainly not going to be liable for being illegals, their sin was to leave a ship stranded unable to sail. This would have been the end of this era, but prior to that, deserting ships was perilous.

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

Do you have a link?

I only came over it be accident, a few years ago, looking at old newspapers for something else. Quite a shock to see people copping jail for that.

[Farmer77]

6 minutes ago, Habitat said:

They might have had contracts, but the working conditions might have been atrocious and unanticipated, and they would attempt to decamp in port, but it seems that around the world in days gone by, but not that far gone by, that this was seen as a threat to the vital arteries of trade, and attracted harsh penalty. I was rather surprised to read an old newspaper archive from the early fifties, where a couple of men were jailed for 18 months for jumping ship to escape intolerable conditions on-board, from a merchant vessel in Brisbane. And they were not aliens. Unimaginable today.

But even that , as horrendous as it is, is not fully being owned by another human being with no hope for it ever ending for you or your children as is the case in the true definition of slavery.

[+Sherapy]

1 minute ago, Habitat said:

I only came over it be accident, a few years ago, looking at old newspapers for something else. Quite a shock to see people copping jail for that.

I would like to be able to read the story myself.