3 ms·

"Expense of other groups" is not at all isomorphic to punishment. In 1866 Southern America it would be strange to talk about how the poor plantation owners were

by HWR_14 3y ago

"Expense of other groups" is not at all isomorphic to punishment. In 1866 Southern America it would be strange to talk about how the poor plantation owners were punished by losing their slave labor force. Yes, they were materially worse off, but it was hardly a punishment. Even if those plantations had been broken up and given to the freed black people as reparations, it wouldn't have been punishment. It would have been backpay.

chii 3y ago
If I were there plantation owner, I would definitely consider the above a punishment.
- Timon3 3y ago
  That just goes to show that we can't rely on people's feelings to judge the world accurately, doesn't it? Or do you suggest we should take it seriously and give slave owners recompense when slavery ends?
  - defrost 3y ago
    That's exactly what the UK did when the Abolitionists ended British Slavery. They achieved this by promising to repay slave owners for the "loss of chattel". The UK Government repaid slave owners and carried the loss forward over the next 200 years until just a few years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/12/treasury-tweet-slavery-compensate-slave-owners https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/12/treasu...
    - Timon3 3y ago
      I know that this happened. I'm asking: is it right?
      - defrost 3y ago
        At the time it was neccesary otherwise British involvement in slavery would not have ended. What would have made it much better was additional compensation to those enslaved. What was a good outcome for society, other than the obvious end of slavery of course, was the relatively vast amount of money freed up to reinvest in other massive capital projects, rail, canals, free colonies (no prisoner labour | slaves) for agriculture, wool, timber, etc. What was a poor outcome for broader society was that ownership of and direct benefits from all these new projects were largely concentrated in a small group of former slaveholders. Such is the ebb and flow of reality which rarely examples purely black and white expressions of some particular notion of absolute right.

by HWR_14 3y ago

chii 3y ago

If I were there plantation owner, I would definitely consider the above a punishment.

Timon3 3y ago
That just goes to show that we can't rely on people's feelings to judge the world accurately, doesn't it? Or do you suggest we should take it seriously and give slave owners recompense when slavery ends?
- defrost 3y ago
  That's exactly what the UK did when the Abolitionists ended British Slavery. They achieved this by promising to repay slave owners for the "loss of chattel". The UK Government repaid slave owners and carried the loss forward over the next 200 years until just a few years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/12/treasury-tweet-slavery-compensate-slave-owners https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/12/treasu...
  - Timon3 3y ago
    I know that this happened. I'm asking: is it right?
    - defrost 3y ago
      At the time it was neccesary otherwise British involvement in slavery would not have ended. What would have made it much better was additional compensation to those enslaved. What was a good outcome for society, other than the obvious end of slavery of course, was the relatively vast amount of money freed up to reinvest in other massive capital projects, rail, canals, free colonies (no prisoner labour | slaves) for agriculture, wool, timber, etc. What was a poor outcome for broader society was that ownership of and direct benefits from all these new projects were largely concentrated in a small group of former slaveholders. Such is the ebb and flow of reality which rarely examples purely black and white expressions of some particular notion of absolute right.