4 ms·
Note: this topic is a horrible derail from the OP. >> Does the United States actually practice slavery in the prison system in any fashion? >Yes, and it is pr
by Chaebixi 9y ago
Note: this topic is a horrible derail from the OP.
>> Does the United States actually practice slavery in the prison system in any fashion?
>Yes, and it is precisely the reason the US is one of the few eligible countries not to have ratified the main current treaty against slavery, the ILO Forced Labor Convention.
That's false. Involuntary servitude is not slavery. Here's the definition of slave:
> a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another;
To be a slave, you have to be someone's property, as in able to be bought and sold as chattle.
> the main current treaty against slavery, the ILO Forced Labor Convention.
That treaty clearly prohibits a much broader class of things than just slavery, it purports to ban forced labor of almost any kind (for anyone who isn't "an adult able-bodied male", apparently):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_Labour_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_Labour_Convention
> Its object and purpose is to suppress the use of forced labour in all its forms irrespective of the nature of the work or the sector of activity in which it may be performed. The Convention defines forced labour as "all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily", with few exceptions like compulsorly military service. The convention excludes "adult able-bodied males", to whom legal imposition of forced labour is allowed.
- emodendroket 9y agoOK, so they're not slaves, they're just people who enjoy no freedom, can be sent to and from facilities at the state's whim, and who are subject to forced labor. I feel like this is a distinction without a difference.
- EpicEng 9y agoThe difference is that you committed a crime, landed yourself in jail, are not the property of the state, and have a finite term to serve. Sounds like a big difference to me.
- emodendroket 9y agoHistorically, that was at times abused by simply creating a lot of laws you could wantonly charge black people with breaking. But even setting that aside, we are simply calling slavery (or, at best, indentured servitude) an appropriate punishment for crime, not describing some phenomenon wholly different in kind. Consider the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. It specifically exempts prison labor from its prohibition on slavery.
- realusername 9y agoDoes not seem any different to me, if the only difference is the jail, you can just create a bullshit law to put those people in jail (see the war on drugs).
- dragonwriter 9y agoExplicit slavery as punishment for a crime and/or for a fixed term is not uncommon; clearly the slaves in US prisons aren't fee simple property of the state, but fee simple isn't the only kind of property relationship. None of the elements you mention distinguish US penal slavery from historical institutions hmthst were unambiguously recognized as slavery.
- magpi3 9y agoYou mean you have been convicted of a crime. Very important distinction
- pharrington 9y agoChattle slavery, though one of the most recent forms of slavery, and the most heinous to date, is not the only type of slavery. Able bodied inmates have no choice whether or not to work when ordered to. Companies routinely rent prison labor to avoid having to pay employee wages for work. Private prisons routinely sell non-able bodied inmates to state run prisons. An inmate can neither purchase their freedom nor purchase out of servitude. That there is a time limit on inmate ownership does not mean there is no ownership.