>Fair criticism. I'll rescind my argument and present a new one, that does not rely on my subjective opinions. I really appreciate your attention to fair debat

>Fair criticism. I'll rescind my argument and present a new one, that does not rely on my subjective opinions. I really appreciate your attention to fair debate. Thank you for this. I agree with you that the example of uncompensated prison labor under threat of solitary confinement is morally wrong. I also agree that it at the very least skirts the line of slavery. Where I think we (maybe?) disagree is that prison labor is not in and of itself slavery, nor morally wrong. I'm not even sure that compelled labor is inappropriate as a sentence. Under the right conditions, I tend to see compelled labor as an exemplary sentence because it's less about punishment and more about the repayment of the proverbial debt to society. My criteria for such compelled prison labor amount to: 1. The work should be acceptably safe, at least to common standards of occupational safety. 2. The work should be useful. The goal is not to punish through toil, but to contribute to the collective. 3. The work should benefit the public. It should not be in the service of a private entity. I may be missing something obvious, but I think this more or less communicates what I have in mind. As an example, I sometimes see inmates picking up litter on the side of the highway. This strikes me as appropriate. Overall, I find that people conflate the essence of prison labor with the modalities of prison labor. Just because it's implemented in a horrific an inhumane way doesn't invalidate the general principle. Similarly, the fact that prisons can be inhumane doesn't invalidate the principle of depriving an individual of liberty after a fair trial. It seems like there might be some common ground between us, here. I hope there is :)