Slavery in the U.S.

[Rob]

Nope, not in the 1800s...

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=31...C-RSSFeeds0312

[reddcorp]

Now, finally, we have an actual living "slave" for whom an apology from a living "master" would be in order. And, a living person to whom reparations i.e. back pay should be made by another living person. Or, should the State of Maryland make the apology and make the payments?

A jail sentence for the "master" seems quite appropriate, though.

AWRedd

[tompritchett]

A jail sentence for the "master" seems quite appropriate, though.

In Ky it used to be that anything used in committing of a hunting violation could be confiscated by the state and auctioned off. I think that a similar approach would be appropriate for modern day slavery (heard of a Louisville lawyer that had the hunting judge confiscate the Mercedes that he was using to spotlight deer). If you held a person as a slave for the purpose of cleaning your house, then, in addition to the jail time, you would lose your house. It might make people really think twice.

[hanktrent]

Occasionally, folks will point out that African-Americans also owned slaves in the antebellum south, or that the first slave-owner on our soil was black himself, or that Africans were enslaving other Africans in Africa and the slave ships were only purchasing the result. For a few random examples: http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3483 or http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/sh...9&postcount=81 or http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/sh...ad.php?p=25724

While those facts are interesting and help round out a complex picture of the old south, there often seems to be a hidden defensiveness, or a "so there!" quality in the way they're stated. I never really understood the implications that folks want drawn. Is it that since some blacks participated in slavery, it was less bad for whites to do it? Or that it shows white southerners were less guilty of racism? Or that blacks should have cleaned up their own house before criticizing whites?

Regardless, this modern case is also a living, breathing, contemporary example of that. The "slave owner" is herself black, a former citizen of Cameroon, same as her slave.

If some folks think there's a significance to antebellum slave-owners being black, do they see a significance still today? Does the color and heritage of the modern slave owner in this case prove anything or show anything or have any significance?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[flattop32355]

Does the color and heritage of the modern slave owner in this case prove anything or show anything or have any significance?

It shows that not all attitudes have evolved over the centuries. It shows that some people are still capable of treating other people as less than people. It confirms that slavery was/is not limited to the white race. It shows that humans still has a ways to go before we can consider ourselves, as a species, civilized.

But, then, we knew that already.

[Rob Weaver]

In Ky it used to be that anything used in committing of a hunting violation could be confiscated by the state and auctioned off. I think that a similar approach would be appropriate for modern day slavery (heard of a Louisville lawyer that had the hunting judge confiscate the Mercedes that he was using to spotlight deer). If you held a person as a slave for the purpose of cleaning your house, then, in addition to the jail time, you would lose your house. It might make people really think twice.

Amen. There is a certain "eye for an eye" justice in that which appeals to me! It is also encouraging to remember that the involuntary servitude profiled is not merely immoral, but is justifiably illegal in the United States. A couple good quotes from the ABC article, drawn from the website cited in the first post:
"These clients are not viewed as criminals, even if they are in the United States illegally. … They should be given rights as victims of a crime. The federal government should view them as victims of a crime. We certainly view them as victims of a crime," said Orhant.

"There are criminal laws that have been set out and created and have been passed to assist these individuals. There's immigration laws that have been created and established to assist these individuals and that's what we do," she continued.

[bob 125th nysvi]

I have posted a number of the arguments you cited and it wasn't a "so there".

It was in response to a person trying to imply that slavery was strictly a European on African crime.

Slavery has been a universal constant since historical records have been kept.

And we know that there is a thriving slave trade today but unlike prior to 1945 there is no governmentally protected slave trading done today. It is underground and considered (officially) a crime by all nations.

Citing that people may or may not have benefited from slavery in America in the past, I think you will agree, is a moot point.

Slavery is a historical fact. All the slaves are dead. All the slave holders are dead. And virtually everybody who directly benefited from slavery is dead.

There is no one left who has to 'apologize' for the 'crime' (it wasn't illegal) and no victims to apologize to.

Now if we manage to nail a modern slaveholder there are a lot of laws in this country under which they can be prosecuted.

Of course everything ABC (or any major) news organization covers has to be taken with a grain of salt and they never NEVER give all the facts.

[Rob Weaver]

Good article in the latest Smithsonian on Gordon, the only American ship captain hanged for transporting slaves. Apparently slaving was in the same category as piracy by the 1850s.

[Gary]

My uncle's neighbor next door exploited women from Asia. He and his partners ran several houses of ill repute and my uncle had no clue (Note: the house next to my uncle's was used only to store the cash and as a residency for the scum) until the police and INS raided it and removed over $2 million in cash. I hope that the houses are sold and the money along with the proceeds of the realty sales given to the women.