5 ms·

What's the material difference between being forced to work to pay off an unpayable debt and being forced to work because of a legal fiction of ownership of ano

What's the material difference between being forced to work to pay off an unpayable debt and being forced to work because of a legal fiction of ownership of another human being? There isn't one. This article is about slavery as a real, physical condition, not a legal condition.

gdsimoes 11y ago
You are absolutely right.
scoofy 11y ago
You can leave. You can get up and walk away and deal with the law, and possibly go to jail. In this case, it'll 'free' them because they are being defrauded according to the author. A slave cannot leave. A slave will not be jailed, a slave will be returned to their master and forced to work again. It's fucked up, but it's not slavery.
- sigmar 11y ago
  >It's fucked up, but it's not slavery. I'm not an expert on this subject, but have learned in the past minute of looking at the bonded labor links in this thread that the UN and other international organizations agree that bonded labor is within the modern definition of slavery. Do you have any sources that say otherwise?
- danharaj 11y ago
  Do you understand what debt bondage is? If you walk away from debt bondage in a society that enforces it, you get dragged back to working in debt bondage. Honestly this is such a pedantic distinction to make for anybody but a human rights lawyer in court.
  - mdpopescu 11y ago
    True. That, however, has nothing to do with the people in the article. The author makes it clear that this WOULD NOT HAPPEN to them.
- jjoonathan 11y ago
  The right to choose is only ever as good as your BATNA, it does not confer power in and of itself. Also, are you sure they're aware of their ability to leave without government-enforced intervention?
  - scoofy 11y ago
    It's not an issue of whether they are aware or not. By the author's own admission, they are only staying because of their own sense of duty, that the debt is illegal, that they are being defrauded. It's one thing to say, workers are being shorted, cheated, etc, but if your headline is "your iphone is being built by slaves" then you should be referring to, at least, people who are being held against their will. Not simply people who are confused about the law and are working for free because of this confusion.
    - SerLava 11y ago
      So you're saying they are confused about their legal rights? As in, they are threatened with violent arrest, imprisonment, loss of their children, and torturous prison conditions. You don't see the powerful coercion to perform bonded labor here? Never mind that the slavemongers are generally incredibly abusive on their own because their victims believe they will have no recourse from the government. It's slavery.
    - barrkel 11y ago
      If you don't leave for fear of being punished, are you being held against your will?
- TheCoelacanth 11y ago
  So you are saying that slavery does not exist unless it is legally sanctioned? I disagree. Any form of coerced labor is slavery whether the coercion is legal or not.
deelowe 11y ago
The difference is that a slave is the legal property of the owner to do as he or she pleases (including destruction of said property, if they deem it necessary). That's a pretty critical difference. Things can still be characterized as being pretty messed up without resorting to misrepresentation.
- danharaj 11y ago
  I mean, you're wrong. The sibling comment to mine that links to wikipedia is a starting point from which one can discover that the United Nations and basically everyone agrees that debt bondage is slavery. Because people think of slavery in terms of its material conditions, not the vagaries of its legal procedures.
  - scoofy 11y ago
    My original point is the article very explicitly points out that the people are not actually being held in debt bondage. That they are simply staying out a sense of duty. This is a fundamental distinction. It's still fucked up, but it's not slavery.
    - filoeleven 11y ago
      > My original point is the article very explicitly points out that the people are not actually being held in debt bondage. Actually, your original point referenced people being "owned and chained" as being distinct from what was described in the quote you pasted from the article, which has this right in it: "This debt bondage is illegal". Do you also take issue with the article's use of the term debt bondage? From Wikipedia: > Debt bondage (also known as debt slavery or bonded labor) is a person's pledge of their labor or services as security for the repayment for a debt or other obligation. How is debt bondage different from "staying out [of] a sense of duty"? Keep in mind that these people aren't free to just walk away--if they are to escape, it has to be just that: an escape. I saw a documentary on this a year or two ago, probably by Vice. The family wanting to leave had to run under the cover of night and rendezvous with someone with a car--only possible with existing outside connections.
mturmon 11y ago
You have been down voted, but I think your point is a good one. To rephrase what you said, the actual, on-the-ground difference between chattel slavery (say, as practiced in the American South) vs. this kind of open-ended debt bondage, which is apparently being winked at by the state and by society at large, may be small.
throwaway_231 11y ago
> forced to work because of a legal fiction of ownership of another human being The same can be said of any piece of paper that assigns ownership to a piece of land, or anything else on this earth.
- danharaj 11y ago
  No argument from me here: i don't support ownership of the means of production, state or private.

gdsimoes 11y ago

You are absolutely right.

scoofy 11y ago

You can leave. You can get up and walk away and deal with the law, and possibly go to jail. In this case, it'll 'free' them because they are being defrauded according to the author. A slave cannot leave. A slave will not be jailed, a slave will be returned to their master and forced to work again. It's fucked up, but it's not slavery.

sigmar 11y ago
>It's fucked up, but it's not slavery. I'm not an expert on this subject, but have learned in the past minute of looking at the bonded labor links in this thread that the UN and other international organizations agree that bonded labor is within the modern definition of slavery. Do you have any sources that say otherwise?
danharaj 11y ago
Do you understand what debt bondage is? If you walk away from debt bondage in a society that enforces it, you get dragged back to working in debt bondage. Honestly this is such a pedantic distinction to make for anybody but a human rights lawyer in court.
- mdpopescu 11y ago
  True. That, however, has nothing to do with the people in the article. The author makes it clear that this WOULD NOT HAPPEN to them.
jjoonathan 11y ago
The right to choose is only ever as good as your BATNA, it does not confer power in and of itself. Also, are you sure they're aware of their ability to leave without government-enforced intervention?
- scoofy 11y ago
  It's not an issue of whether they are aware or not. By the author's own admission, they are only staying because of their own sense of duty, that the debt is illegal, that they are being defrauded. It's one thing to say, workers are being shorted, cheated, etc, but if your headline is "your iphone is being built by slaves" then you should be referring to, at least, people who are being held against their will. Not simply people who are confused about the law and are working for free because of this confusion.
  - SerLava 11y ago
    So you're saying they are confused about their legal rights? As in, they are threatened with violent arrest, imprisonment, loss of their children, and torturous prison conditions. You don't see the powerful coercion to perform bonded labor here? Never mind that the slavemongers are generally incredibly abusive on their own because their victims believe they will have no recourse from the government. It's slavery.
  - barrkel 11y ago
    If you don't leave for fear of being punished, are you being held against your will?
TheCoelacanth 11y ago
So you are saying that slavery does not exist unless it is legally sanctioned? I disagree. Any form of coerced labor is slavery whether the coercion is legal or not.

deelowe 11y ago

The difference is that a slave is the legal property of the owner to do as he or she pleases (including destruction of said property, if they deem it necessary). That's a pretty critical difference. Things can still be characterized as being pretty messed up without resorting to misrepresentation.

danharaj 11y ago
I mean, you're wrong. The sibling comment to mine that links to wikipedia is a starting point from which one can discover that the United Nations and basically everyone agrees that debt bondage is slavery. Because people think of slavery in terms of its material conditions, not the vagaries of its legal procedures.
- scoofy 11y ago
  My original point is the article very explicitly points out that the people are not actually being held in debt bondage. That they are simply staying out a sense of duty. This is a fundamental distinction. It's still fucked up, but it's not slavery.
  - filoeleven 11y ago
    > My original point is the article very explicitly points out that the people are not actually being held in debt bondage. Actually, your original point referenced people being "owned and chained" as being distinct from what was described in the quote you pasted from the article, which has this right in it: "This debt bondage is illegal". Do you also take issue with the article's use of the term debt bondage? From Wikipedia: > Debt bondage (also known as debt slavery or bonded labor) is a person's pledge of their labor or services as security for the repayment for a debt or other obligation. How is debt bondage different from "staying out [of] a sense of duty"? Keep in mind that these people aren't free to just walk away--if they are to escape, it has to be just that: an escape. I saw a documentary on this a year or two ago, probably by Vice. The family wanting to leave had to run under the cover of night and rendezvous with someone with a car--only possible with existing outside connections.

mturmon 11y ago

You have been down voted, but I think your point is a good one. To rephrase what you said, the actual, on-the-ground difference between chattel slavery (say, as practiced in the American South) vs. this kind of open-ended debt bondage, which is apparently being winked at by the state and by society at large, may be small.

throwaway_231 11y ago

> forced to work because of a legal fiction of ownership of another human being The same can be said of any piece of paper that assigns ownership to a piece of land, or anything else on this earth.

danharaj 11y ago
No argument from me here: i don't support ownership of the means of production, state or private.