In favour of slavery?

Slavery, shackles,
Manille sur le Quai, by Remi Jouan

I satted on a recent discussion the following. “Anti-slavery is overrated. I look at some people and think that a few years of being put to servitude would do them, and maybe the economy also, a world of good.

Clearly there would have to be some safeguards to avoid abuse around it. It wouldn’t be the twenty-first century without the government go stickin’ its warty nose in at multiple levels and spoiling everything.”

Well some pinko reacted to this, and came back with the following:

In this scenario, who would you get to actually do the enslaving? You currently are afraid to even raise your voice around the people that you’d hope to enslave. Correct?

That’s right, someone who barely knows me and is clearly terrified themselves projecting all their fear onto me. As per usual.

The full reply

Here’s the reply, and I thought it worth saving here, as comments can easily be deleted. I’d like the work I did on this and the thought I put in not to be erased at the whim of one of the IQ-less offensariat.

“I thought I had just raised it, and unlike yourself I have a traceable ID and a valid photo pic. The people who should be doing the enslaving of these people are the ones currently enslaving me. Namely the state which takes my taxes as a hard-working man who cannot afford to be other than a hard-working man and gives that money to shirkers and border breakers, keeping them in hotels at my expense.

I see no sense for me to grab guns and shackles when I have already been paying for others to do that. Why keep a dog and bark yourself? Instead of paying for the praetorian guard of the elite, we thought we were financing our own police force, to look after the ones actually paying for it.

There should be a citizen-class protection force that we pay for instead of the current Praetorian guard. They should be looking out for our interests first, because the police we are currently paying for seem to have no time for us. They protect criminals as well as the upper class and help these two boards to squeeze the taxpayer like a cattle clamp.

Fair solution

The State should accept newcomers who are looking to come into a better situation that we have looking at their circumstances and what they can offer. Some will find willing sponsors in the private sector immediately, but there’s no market place for them to offer in or us to know whom we could hire from their number. If there are no obvious matches, the matter should be settled by putting these migrants into indenture, and not cushy hotels.

They should serve seven years like the good book says, obviously not in sex slavery or anything so demeaning, there should be inspections as part of the system, but in work that benefits society. Work like clearing plastic wastes and working on recycling plants to make useful things from waste which they sort. Or in looking after the elderly under supervision. Generally doing things we don’t have willing hands for but which are essential tasks.

They should receive clothing, housing food and healthcare but at a basic level. Their children should be educate at the same level as locals; this is a fair investment. They should receive 50 dollars a week for their own disposal subject to the good carrying out of their duties.

The outcome of the indenture

At the end of their seven years, the Agency should review their work. If the work is good and they have folk who will vouch for them, then they join society on the same basis as those who have paid taxes all their lives and who therefore also been slaves. Fair’s fair. It’s just that our slavery happened intermingled with our freedom, whereas they have it in one go. Afterwards no-one cantell them they have not paid their dues because they will have paid them that way. Or by military service as the French used to do, which could mean serving in an armed service to the point where they perform a medal-level act of valour or five years if shorter.

This will be particularly useful for those fleeing despots – they will acquire skills useful for the liberation of their countries. This latter military option should be for persons who have had extensive psychological evaluation and monitoring. It is not something we would want to offer to anyone who evinces philosophical or religious objections to a pluralistic, Western, democratic society.

Exceptional cases

If they are refugees of war or seekers of political asylum, then they should be at liberty to return if peace comes and they will receive the value of the work they did at minimum wage, to take with them, help them rebuild. Should they be simply economic migrants who change their mind, or those who found work at minimum wage or better, then they get no exit refunds.

If they endured persecution as intellectuals and applied for political asylum, or indeed anyone who has a needed skill, if they find sponsors or employers to give them a better deal for working on in their specialisation, then they may obviate the indenture system. The sponsor becomes co-responsible should they commit criminal acts during the seven years from arrival.

This form of slavery would be necessary to keep our kind of society strong and not succumb to such states as China where the masses are in genuine servitude in all but name, with no light at the end of the tunnel.

Now please go ahead and tell me that I am wrong, but don’t tell me I will not raise my voice for it.”

By all means discuss below. I think this place threads better than other places and I only boot for spam and personalised abuse of other readers, as well as outright racism and anti-Semitism.

Slavery and restitution

The problem in my view is that some white folk who learned about all the evil stuff that, for example, the British ruling class did around the world until we all gradually woke up to the fact that it was not sustainable, they think that the onus is on them to redress the balance in some way.

To an extent we did redress the balance – we have given a lot back to the descendents of the folk who had a rough deal before, both in terms of historical reparations and also by inviting many of them to join us as equal beneficiaries of whatever these things are supposed to have given our country. But anyway often it was because of their own leaders that they had a rough deal. We didn’t go chasing slaves in the jungle, we simply bought them in the port from those African leaders that we were trading with, and those guys had only kept their defeated enemies alive so that they could trade them as slaves with us. Once you get into individual details things are not necessarily as cut and dried as people could imagine – for every noble Kunte Kinte you might discover someone much less noble, someone whose most apt description sounds similar to that old fictional African only without one vowel.
I personally don’t come from the ruling class – in all the lines of genealogy I am able to trace I come to miners, before the industrial revolution simple farmers, and on some cases naval people. There is only one line with “blue blood” but it is not legitimate, so I have no claim to be an Earl of Warwick even though I am probably a distant genetic cousin of the earls of Warwick.
As far as the working class of England was concerned, we didn’t get an easier time really because of the things that our elites were doing elsewhere in the world. We were in many cases treated worse than slaves, because a slave is property whereas when a miner keeled over with lung disease the master of the mine called out for the next desparate man in the queue to work in the mine. And such was the lot, I fondly imagine, of some of my ancestors.

On that basis, I should be getting reparations from the Third World at the rate of one Mango a month in perpetuity plus the occasional sexual favour from one of those black ladies you see on all the music videos, which I will pass on anyway in the interests of my family and my soul. But anyway that’s nothing to what I’m owed by the Queen of Denmark for excesses perpetrated during the Viking invasions.

So in short, even though I can say that it was shameful it’s not MY shame that the British, for example, tried to make China a drug addicted slave colony and then smuggled out their tea plants to mass plantations in India and decided we didn’t need the Chinese so much any more, at least we gave back Hong Kong honorably. Certain others didn’t give back Vladivostok, ceded at the same Peking Convention, because they are not leveraged by the same soft conscience that seems to weigh us down. But it’s not MY shame that “we” had a past with China that isn’t glorious but it isn’t MY cost that “we” gave back Hong Kong (I didn’t own any of it anyway) and it isn’t MY pride that “we” gave it back – nobody asked for my opinion about it, they just did it on my behalf and on the behalves (?) of another 58 million entirely unconsulted British people.