3 ms·

I'm pretty sure you're making a political point but: How are criminals enslaved? Who owns them?

by _9ptr 1y ago

ryanmcbride 1y ago
The prisons. I mean more specifically the state or federal government ultimately but the prisons more practically. The 13th amendment specifically carves out an exception to allow prisoners to be enslaved. They aren't just using political rhetoric: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_exception_clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_exception_clause You know in movies and cartoons and stuff when you'd see like, a whole bunch of prisoners in striped pajamas, chained together breaking rocks or digging ditches or whatever? Those are depictions of an enslaved workforce.
- _9ptr 1y ago
  Forced labor for criminals isn't the same as being a slave. They are not owned by the state. We have a similar sounding exception clause in Germany, and nobody would call the prisoners slaves. That being said, I don't doubt that the american prison systems has severe problems, for example the one raised in the other answer to my previous comment.
  - JohnFen 1y ago
    > Forced labor for criminals isn't the same as being a slave. The difference is so slight as to be meaningless.
  - ryanmcbride 1y ago
    That's cool but I'm not talking about Germany.
  - delecti 1y ago
    The text of the 13th amendment makes a direct equivalence between the chattel slavery it outlawed and the incarcerated forced labor that it left unaffected: > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, *except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted*, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction The plain reading of that text is that slavery remains a permitted punishment in the US.
    - _9ptr 1y ago
      I don't know much about constitutional law, either german or american, but I know you often can't just "plain read" the text.
      - stirfish 1y ago
        Maybe some additional context would help. Right after the civil war, 1. slavery became illegal, except as punishment for a crime 2. a ton of vague laws sprung up, like "malicious mischief". Look up "Jim Crow" or "black codes" to get a sense of these. 3. States started "convict-leasing" out prisoners as a source of income, often right back to the plantations that slaves were liberated from before. The convicted were not paid for this labor. Additional context: Virginia Supreme Court rules that inmates are slaves to the state in 1871: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/slaves-state https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/slaves-s... Virginia held the capitol of the Confederacy - the states that tried to leave the USA to retain their slaves. I forget why the crime exception was added to the 13th amendment, but I assume it was to make it more palatable to the states that still wanted slaves
    - Anthony-G 1y ago
      I’m not an American or a constitutional expert but my plain reading of that text is that the exception is for “involuntary servitude”. You could read it both ways but that’s how I’d understand it.
  - stirfish 1y ago
    > nobody would call the prisoners slaves. We Americans don't like doing that either, because it makes us uncomfortable. >Forced labor for criminals isn't the same as being a slave. They are not owned by the state. I'm having trouble understanding how it's different. They are held by the state, forced to work, are not free to leave, and we have a bit of a history...
    - SoftTalker 1y ago
      It’s the “convicted of a crime” part that makes it different.
      - lukas099 1y ago
        So we've come to the difference of opinions, which is that your definition of slavery excludes those convicted of a crime, while others' doesn't. Not a very interesting point to debate on.
        SoftTalker 1y ago
        Yes, I think there is a difference between being kidnapped from your home, shipped across the ocean and sold into a life of servitude (with any children you have being born into the same condition, or yourself being born into such a situation) vs. doing labor as part of a sentence for a crime of which you have been duly convicted (and will someday be released from). That is my opinion.
        stirfish 1y ago
        Would your opinion change if the legal system that permitted people to be kidnapped, shipped, and sold, was the same system that decided if you're a criminal fit to be kidnapped, shipped, and sold?
        SoftTalker 1y ago
        No. The system that allowed the former was changed. I reject the premise that convicted criminals were or are "kidnapped, shipped, and sold" in any way that is comparable to chattel slavery. Were there some abuses? Probably. We live in an imperfect world.
axus 1y ago
Here's an article, the power relationship was exercised by denying parole that would have otherwise been granted without a profit motive: https://archive.ph/0gVie https://archive.ph/0gVie "Since 2018, about 575 companies and more than 100 public agencies in Alabama have used incarcerated people as landscapers, janitors, drivers, metal fabricators and fast-food workers, the lawsuit states, reaping an annual benefit of $450 million."

I'm pretty sure you're making a political point but: How are criminals enslaved? Who owns them?

by _9ptr 1y ago

I'm pretty sure you're making a political point but: How are criminals enslaved? Who owns them?

The prisons. I mean more specifically the state or federal government ultimately but the prisons more practically. The 13th amendment specifically carves out an exception to allow prisoners to be enslaved. They aren't just using political rhetoric: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_exception_clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_exception_clause You know in movies and cartoons and stuff when you'd see like, a whole bunch of prisoners in striped pajamas, chained together breaking rocks or digging ditches or whatever? Those are depictions of an enslaved workforce.

_9ptr 1y ago
Forced labor for criminals isn't the same as being a slave. They are not owned by the state. We have a similar sounding exception clause in Germany, and nobody would call the prisoners slaves. That being said, I don't doubt that the american prison systems has severe problems, for example the one raised in the other answer to my previous comment.
- JohnFen 1y ago
  > Forced labor for criminals isn't the same as being a slave. The difference is so slight as to be meaningless.
- ryanmcbride 1y ago
  That's cool but I'm not talking about Germany.
- delecti 1y ago
  The text of the 13th amendment makes a direct equivalence between the chattel slavery it outlawed and the incarcerated forced labor that it left unaffected: > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, *except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted*, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction The plain reading of that text is that slavery remains a permitted punishment in the US.
  - _9ptr 1y ago
    I don't know much about constitutional law, either german or american, but I know you often can't just "plain read" the text.
    - stirfish 1y ago
      Maybe some additional context would help. Right after the civil war, 1. slavery became illegal, except as punishment for a crime 2. a ton of vague laws sprung up, like "malicious mischief". Look up "Jim Crow" or "black codes" to get a sense of these. 3. States started "convict-leasing" out prisoners as a source of income, often right back to the plantations that slaves were liberated from before. The convicted were not paid for this labor. Additional context: Virginia Supreme Court rules that inmates are slaves to the state in 1871: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/slaves-state https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/slaves-s... Virginia held the capitol of the Confederacy - the states that tried to leave the USA to retain their slaves. I forget why the crime exception was added to the 13th amendment, but I assume it was to make it more palatable to the states that still wanted slaves
  - Anthony-G 1y ago
    I’m not an American or a constitutional expert but my plain reading of that text is that the exception is for “involuntary servitude”. You could read it both ways but that’s how I’d understand it.
- stirfish 1y ago
  > nobody would call the prisoners slaves. We Americans don't like doing that either, because it makes us uncomfortable. >Forced labor for criminals isn't the same as being a slave. They are not owned by the state. I'm having trouble understanding how it's different. They are held by the state, forced to work, are not free to leave, and we have a bit of a history...
  - SoftTalker 1y ago
    It’s the “convicted of a crime” part that makes it different.
    - lukas099 1y ago
      So we've come to the difference of opinions, which is that your definition of slavery excludes those convicted of a crime, while others' doesn't. Not a very interesting point to debate on.
      - SoftTalker 1y ago
        Yes, I think there is a difference between being kidnapped from your home, shipped across the ocean and sold into a life of servitude (with any children you have being born into the same condition, or yourself being born into such a situation) vs. doing labor as part of a sentence for a crime of which you have been duly convicted (and will someday be released from). That is my opinion.
        stirfish 1y ago
        Would your opinion change if the legal system that permitted people to be kidnapped, shipped, and sold, was the same system that decided if you're a criminal fit to be kidnapped, shipped, and sold?
        SoftTalker 1y ago
        No. The system that allowed the former was changed. I reject the premise that convicted criminals were or are "kidnapped, shipped, and sold" in any way that is comparable to chattel slavery. Were there some abuses? Probably. We live in an imperfect world.

axus 1y ago

Here's an article, the power relationship was exercised by denying parole that would have otherwise been granted without a profit motive: https://archive.ph/0gVie https://archive.ph/0gVie "Since 2018, about 575 companies and more than 100 public agencies in Alabama have used incarcerated people as landscapers, janitors, drivers, metal fabricators and fast-food workers, the lawsuit states, reaping an annual benefit of $450 million."