Oh go away, they did not vote for “slavery”. They voted to allow making convicted felons work as part of their sentence. It’s slavery in the same sense that working to buy food and pay rent is “slavery”. Metaphorically yes, but calling it slavery devalues the experiences of all the people who were kidnapped from their homes, brought here in chains on ships, and sold in a market.
Hey, would you look at that, chattel slavery isn’t the only type. That is amazing, no one could have guessed that until right now, after I looked it up. It is almost like it being called chattel slavery implies multiple forms of slavery. Wow, this is so new, and novel.
Yeah it’s a big world! Here’s another new thing for you - look up “Indentured servitude”. It’s where you are forced to work to pay off a debt or something, but it’s not “slavery” and nobody owns you. Kind of like in prison.
Look up the 13th amendment, and why they had to write in an exclusionary clause to it because, even people from a time of chattel slavery practice, knew this was slavery too, and not indentured servitude, which stayed legal for decades afterwards! The factors making it slavery are quite eloquently explained, namely that indentured servitude was a contract the indentured servant had to agree to! Isn’t that neat? It wasn’t legally forced on them! Wanna know something else cool? The fact that it is a contractual agreement is STILL the definition!
“Just like?” I dunno, was Tom in prison for committing crimes or did somebody just kidnap him or his ancestors and say okay you’re a slave now? If you’re going to ignore that difference this conversation is pointless.
The better question is, was he in prison due to unjust laws and unfair application of law due to the colour of his skin? Fuck it, they’re locked up, force to him work regardless.
Yes, let’s read the 13th Amendment together: “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.”
Notice that two things are listed - slavery and involuntary servitude. I define convict labor as involuntary servitude. The 13th Amendment doesn’t back up either interpretation.
Yeah guy, we are both referencing the same idea, but from distinctly different perspectives, it would seem. You seem to like the punishment clauses, whereas I would argue that an Amendment ratified in 1865 is very much due for an overhaul.
Oh go away, they did not vote for “slavery”. They voted to allow making convicted felons work as part of their sentence. It’s slavery in the same sense that working to buy food and pay rent is “slavery”. Metaphorically yes, but calling it slavery devalues the experiences of all the people who were kidnapped from their homes, brought here in chains on ships, and sold in a market.
Hey, would you look at that, chattel slavery isn’t the only type. That is amazing, no one could have guessed that until right now, after I looked it up. It is almost like it being called chattel slavery implies multiple forms of slavery. Wow, this is so new, and novel.
Yeah it’s a big world! Here’s another new thing for you - look up “Indentured servitude”. It’s where you are forced to work to pay off a debt or something, but it’s not “slavery” and nobody owns you. Kind of like in prison.
Look up the 13th amendment, and why they had to write in an exclusionary clause to it because, even people from a time of chattel slavery practice, knew this was slavery too, and not indentured servitude, which stayed legal for decades afterwards! The factors making it slavery are quite eloquently explained, namely that indentured servitude was a contract the indentured servant had to agree to! Isn’t that neat? It wasn’t legally forced on them! Wanna know something else cool? The fact that it is a contractual agreement is STILL the definition!
Just like uncle Tom, working in the house so he could make a living…as a slave. But hey, they fed and clothed him, so is it still slavery?
“Just like?” I dunno, was Tom in prison for committing crimes or did somebody just kidnap him or his ancestors and say okay you’re a slave now? If you’re going to ignore that difference this conversation is pointless.
Right because the US is known for having a very fair “justice” system
The better question is, was he in prison due to unjust laws and unfair application of law due to the colour of his skin? Fuck it, they’re locked up, force to him work regardless.
That’s always A question in an individual case, but assuming convicts are innocent isn’t rational.
And neither is forcing them into labour
Something something 13th Amendment?
Yes, let’s read the 13th Amendment together: “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.”
Notice that two things are listed - slavery and involuntary servitude. I define convict labor as involuntary servitude. The 13th Amendment doesn’t back up either interpretation.
Yeah guy, we are both referencing the same idea, but from distinctly different perspectives, it would seem. You seem to like the punishment clauses, whereas I would argue that an Amendment ratified in 1865 is very much due for an overhaul.
I wonder who is disproportionately sent to jail…?
Minimum wage who?
Pass a minimum wage law for prisoners and then you’ll have a point.
You’re a terrible human being.