Slavery

[grannywils]

We were on another thread regarding Foreign troops on national soil when we somehow became briefly sidetracked onto the subject of slavery. In response to someone else's post I reminded him that slavery was legally abolished in the United States under the Lincoln Republican government. I was reminded by another poster, tamujiin, that I had gone off topic with the following somewhat disingenuous post:

 

"How did this debate get from forgein troops to slavery? What does that have to do with diddly squat in todays time? Really... Come one slavery is a thing of the past in most parts of the world. A majority of reasons why governments are changing also is to ensure womens equal rights.....

 

And really im not saying women have em, im just saying things are changing.... Thats left for another debate though."

I too will leave women's rights for another topic, and will also bite my tongue with respect to my need for spelling and grammar corrections. Those are my own personal pet peeves and have no place here. However, I am somewhat aghast at the naivete of this poster if he really believes that slavery is a non issue anywhere in this world at this time...

 

There was also a follow up post from my friend csgators to whom I was actually responding with my Lincoln Republcan's statement:

 

"In the US it did (America was the libertarian movement I was referring to) but slavery was not new to America. It was in fact very normal through most of history."

 

Well, yes CS you are correct that it was in fact very normal throughout most of history; but I am not sure I get your point. Does that make it ok?? It still exists just about everywhere. Is that ok?

 

Here are some facts for all our perusal. I am fascinated to know what everyone thinks. I have given a link to some further data, as I do not want to fill up this post with too much verbiage. Those who have an interest, please feel free to take a look. I believe you will find it rather distressing.

 

 

The number of slaves today is higher than at any point in history,remaining as high as 12 million to 27 million,though this is probably the smallest proportion of the world's population in history. Most are debt slaves, largely in South Asia, who are under debt bondage incurred by lenders, sometimes even for generations. Human trafficking is primarily used for forcing women and children into sex industries. (Reference Wikipedia "Slavery")

 

In addition I recently saw a National Geographic article on the web which stated that There are more slaves today than were seized from Africa in four centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. It further stated that the modern commerce in humans rivals illegal drug trafficking in its global reach and in its destruction of lives.

 

Following is a link which gives in broad detail just what kinds of real slavery still exist in our world today (including in the United States) http://www.antislavery.org/english/slavery_today/what_is_modern_slavery.aspx

[csgators]

"In the US it did (America was the libertarian movement I was referring to) but slavery was not new to America. It was in fact very normal through most of history."[/size][/font]

 

[/b][/color]Well, yes CS you are correct that it was in fact very normal throughout most of history; but I am not sure I get your point. Does that make it ok?? It still exists just about everywhere. Is that ok?

 

 

No, no, no and no. And no. I was responding to someone who implied that libertarians somehow invented or endorsed slavery when in fact it was the libertarian mindset that abolished it as a government endorsed practice in much of the world. Libertarians want liberty for ALL people so slavery is the opposite of the goal of libertarians. Doesn't seem too hard of a concept to grasp.

 

Does slavery exist? Clearly. Since it is underground for the most part it is much harder to stop now. It is in fact very, very sad. A friend of mine where I live is trying very hard to free someone he knows from slavery. She was tricked into taking a "job" in Malaysia and when she got there they said she now has to earn the price of her coming there. Trying to get anyone to do something about it is a major challenge since they seem to "own" the local police force as well. We will see what the British and American embassies can do to help a poor Vietnamese woman out of slavery. Thanks to foursquare and a phone call we even know exactly where she is being held.

[myrmaad]

Gran I'm glad you brought this up; yes slavery remains.

 

However today's slavery is not the same as Chattel slavery embraced by a government that held that those slaves were not human by virtue of the color of their skin and their foreign origin of birth, and therefore that it was perfectly legal to beat them openly, rape them openly, abuse them openly, starve them openly and even kill them openly because they were fully owned as property. That is chattel slavery.

 

Furthermore, I did not imply that libertarians invented slavery, but if you think that libertarianism does not endorse slavery you are terribly misguided. There is a reason the Libertarianism pervades the US South. Lincoln may have ended the federal endorsement of slavery (and by the way that is what I said before, that the government you idealized was a government that endorsed slavery) but that did not end it on the local levels especially after reconstruction period was over and the advent of Jim Crow came about.

 

Libertarians believe that they should be able to do whatever they want to do on their own property. Thus a non-property owner has no such rights.

 

 

And just for the record, the Republican party of Lincoln's day is not the same Republican party of today, their platforms are like night and day. They have nothing in common. The Republican party today has much more in common with the Southern Democrats of the 20th century.

[csgators]

Gran I'm glad you brought this up; yes slavery remains.

 

However today's slavery is not the same as Chattel slavery embraced by a government that held that those slaves were not human by virtue of the color of their skin and their foreign origin of birth, and therefore that it was perfectly legal to beat them openly, rape them openly, abuse them openly, starve them openly and even kill them openly because they were fully owned as property. That is chattel slavery.

 

Furthermore, I did not imply that libertarians invented slavery, but if you think that libertarianism does not endorse slavery you are terribly misguided. There is a reason the Libertarianism pervades the US South. Lincoln may have ended the federal endorsement of slavery (and by the way that is what I said before, that the government you idealized was a government that endorsed slavery) but that did not end it on the local levels especially after reconstruction period was over and the advent of Jim Crow came about.

 

Libertarians believe that they should be able to do whatever they want to do on their own property. Thus a non-property owner has no such rights.

 

 

And just for the record, the Republican party of Lincoln's day is not the same Republican party of today, their platforms are like night and day. They have nothing in common. The Republican party today has much more in common with the Southern Democrats of the 20th century.

 

I couldn't disagree more.

[Moveing]

And just for the record, the Republican party of Lincoln's day is not the same Republican party of today, their platforms are like night and day. They have nothing in common. The Republican party today has much more in common with the Southern Democrats of the 20th century.

 

Nope. Thats as far away from the reality as possible.

 

Republicans, even mainline, still have the same principles as at Lincolns days. The RINO(republicans only in name) Faction and the NeoCons(Which have their root in Trotzkism) are a diffrent Story.

 

The Democrates are still the same.

Back in days they hold slaves in free housing, give them food and medical treat to pick cotton.

But nowadays they were promissed free housing, food and medicare not for picking cotton, but for vote. This is their new system of slavery and holding them down.

 

http://rearleft.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/alabamademslogo.jpg

 

By the way here is the Liberal icon Margeret Sanger of Planet Parenthood

[myrmaad]

That's hilarious.

 

http://cprr.org/Museum/Ephemera/Republican_Platform_1860.html

[grannywils]

Although I see we are already getting a bit off topic here, I could not agree with you more Myr. That is why I specified the "Lincoln Republicans" when I stated that slavery was abolished by them. I do agree that the two parties have basically swapped positions at least on that particular issue since those days.

 

Although I rarely agree with Moveing on much of anything, I will say this. You have a point when you say that "promises of free housing, etc. are something of a means of keeping people down. However, I do not put the blame for this on the Democrats or even the Republicans (surprisingly). I blame this on pure laziness and greed and mostly on racism on the part of all of our governments in the past. We are seeing now the stupidity of some of those decisions, and we are having to deal with the results. Once again we are blaming the victims rather than looking at the causes.

 

Again, this is a much deeper issue and probably deserves another thread or perhaps another forum for that matter...

[HeyYou]

4. That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right of each state, to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends, and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any state or territory, no matter under what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

 

This from the party that gave us Iraq, and Afghanistan?

 

Not quite as funny as this one though:

 

6. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the Federal Government; that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans; while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the federal metropolis, show that an entire change of Administration is imperatively demanded.

 

From the party of borrow and spend. :) According to this bit, we should vote ALL of them out of office. Which really wouldn't hurt my feelings at all.

[Marxist ßastard]

6. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the Federal Government; that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans; while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the federal metropolis, show that an entire change of Administration is imperatively demanded.

From the party of borrow and spend.

Of course, during his administration Lincoln increased the national debt 30-fold.

[Aurielius]

6. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the Federal Government; that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans; while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the federal metropolis, show that an entire change of Administration is imperatively demanded.

From the party of borrow and spend.

Of course, during his administration Lincoln increased the national debt 30-fold.

Paying for four years of Civil War doesn't come cheap, considering the outcome it was a bargain.