5 ms·

> Slavery started to fade away around the 1800s. This is completely wrong. In the 1800 US census, it recorded 893,602 slaves. By the time of the 1860 census (t

> Slavery started to fade away around the 1800s. This is completely wrong. In the 1800 US census, it recorded 893,602 slaves. By the time of the 1860 census (the last before the Civil War), that had risen to 3.9 million slaves (the 1850 census showed 3.2 million, so it was obviously still rising). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1800_United_States_census https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1800_United_States_census https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_United_States_census https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_United_States_census

roenxi 6y ago
Good point. I mistyped and changed my comment to say "through". And that shows slavery halving as a % of the population.
- phaemon 6y ago
  So now you're saying that "slavery started to fade away" as soon as it was abolished but it had nothing to do with the actual abolition? Just co-incidence? And, yes, it halved as a % of the population because the urban population was growing faster than the slave population was growing. That doesn't mean it was shrinking.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    Banning slavery had a big effect. But the ban wouldn't hold if slavery made economic sense. It isn't as though the the people were suddenly imbued with a moral spirit - we've had human history for literal millennia. Slavery being bad for slaves is not a complicated concept, people knew about that forever. Making slavery unprofitable is more impressive than actually banning it. Both are good, but enabling freedom is still a substantially more powerful change than the simply banning of slavery. Much like how banning heroin doesn't actually cause heroin to die out if there is a demand for it; we may yet see heroin legalised in my lifetime much like marijuana. It is entirely possible. Slavery ain't coming back, it benefits pretty much nobody. There isn't a billion dollar industry in slaves waiting to be discovered.

roenxi 6y ago

Good point. I mistyped and changed my comment to say "through". And that shows slavery halving as a % of the population.

phaemon 6y ago
So now you're saying that "slavery started to fade away" as soon as it was abolished but it had nothing to do with the actual abolition? Just co-incidence? And, yes, it halved as a % of the population because the urban population was growing faster than the slave population was growing. That doesn't mean it was shrinking.
- roenxi 6y ago
  Banning slavery had a big effect. But the ban wouldn't hold if slavery made economic sense. It isn't as though the the people were suddenly imbued with a moral spirit - we've had human history for literal millennia. Slavery being bad for slaves is not a complicated concept, people knew about that forever. Making slavery unprofitable is more impressive than actually banning it. Both are good, but enabling freedom is still a substantially more powerful change than the simply banning of slavery. Much like how banning heroin doesn't actually cause heroin to die out if there is a demand for it; we may yet see heroin legalised in my lifetime much like marijuana. It is entirely possible. Slavery ain't coming back, it benefits pretty much nobody. There isn't a billion dollar industry in slaves waiting to be discovered.