Is slavery evil?

Just curious. A lot of conservatives in this thread seem to be defending the south to the bitter end. They won't even acknowledge that the south was morally wrong about maintaining slavery. They seem more concerned with establishing that the North didn't give a damn about slavery. (Even if true, which it isn't, that doesn't answer the question: was the South morally wrong to keep slavery going?)

Nobody denies that at one time the north and south both owned slaves. Nor does anyone deny that slavery still exists today. And I'm sure Brewskier will be quick to point out that there were and continue to be BLACK slave owners, which to him apparently means that the blacks who were enslaved in the Americas suffered no wrong. So you can leave all of these points off the table.

Is slavery evil?

 

Sure slavery is evil, so is rewriting and lying about history to dumb-down towards discriminatory, unjust political gain in the now. In present context of this country right now, race-baiting, race-carding and race-agitating are FAR more evil than slavery because slavery hasn't existed in this country for 150 years and those other evils continue to poison our culture day to day all over the country and on this forum.

 

So you're saying that this country would be in a morally superior position if we just enslaved all of the people who are race baiters, therefore eliminating race baiting and returning slavery? After all, slavery is not as evil as racebaiting.

 

Facepalm. Does the hospital insert strawman and non sequitur genes into leftists at birth? Seems so. By your logic... nm.

What I'm saying is that slavery didn't cause the recent and completely avoidable social, cultural and economic damage in Ferguson. Those other things sure did though.

 

Yes I agree. Blacks would be in the exact same social and economic position today as they would have been if not for slavery.

 

Well, they'd be living in huts, wiping their asses with their hands and dropping from Ebola right now if not for slavery, perhaps we can agree on that. See how your brand of logic works? Nice, eh?

 

Yes, its evil..

Slavery was the economic engine that drove the South.. and it is still evil.. It was evil for the Greeks, Romans, Vikings, Arabs, Khazars and everyone else.

 

Can you provide the quotes of these posters you are speaking of? To go and create such a thread, we'd love to see some proof of your accusations. This is a bait-thread.

 

Is slavery evil?

It's a difficult question to answer, because slavery existed for thousands of years in various forms throughout hundreds of cultures.

The question also assumes that there is an objective and universal standard of good and evil. I won't attempt to argue that point either way, but the assumption - which is not shared by everyone - is worth noting before any serious attempt at an answer is made.

The easy answer is, yes, slavery is "evil", which is to say it is wrong according to the ethics of contemporary western society.

But a more serious, and therefore satisfying, answer would require a measure of intellectual depth and honesty that does not seem possible in this particular forum, which is why I will not waste my time with any such attempt.

 

No slavery is not inherently evil. It was, in fact, a necessity for many groups. Including those who sold their slaves to the white man in America.

But as I pointed out in that thread... are you attempting to claim that morality is objective and not subjective?

And finally... the point was not is slavery moral. The point I was making is that abolishing slavery was unconstitutional the way the north went about it.

 

Absolutely.

People create threads about something that hasn't existed for a century and a half.

While cheering on the race-agitation we see every week.

 

So because it was their chosen method of making a living, it was a necessity?

I'm not trying to pass judgment on individual slave owners. I'm asking whether abolishing slavery is a morally superior position to maintaining slavery.

Obviously people born during that time were raised to believe slavery is okay. So morality is subjective to the point that those people probably couldn't be expected to see the error of their way. That aside, we can still judge whether the institution of slavery is (or was) evil.

Didn't the north "go about" abolishing slavery AFTER the south declared independence? I'm pretty sure the emancipation proclamation and the 13th amendment came DURING the war. So you're basically justifying the war on events that occurred after it was declared.

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=376381&page=12&p=1064322237#post1064322237

 

It's common knowledge that during the civil war period, slavery was NOT the issue. Lincoln knew that the Union was suffering, and he introduced the abolition issue to regain popularity for his cause.
What is the real difference between the Roman empire and the present day? Back then, 2/3 of all people were slaves. Right now, 2/3 or MORE of the people are SLAVES to subsistence wages. Call it a different name, and it's still evil. It's the way of the world, as the world has been fashioned in the current version.

 

No I'm referring more to the fact that in a context of tribal warfare, slavery was often the moral high road.

Well then I'm not sure what bringing up the south has to do with anything. As far as whether or not slavery is inherently evil... not necessarily. If the options are to kill the men women and children or to kill the men and enslave the women and children, which is better?

The north was violating the constitution well before that. Not only did they violate the constitution, they directly ignored the Supreme Court decision on the matter.

Furthermore a "proclamation" by the President does not override the constitution. To amend the constitution it requires a 2/3 vote in the House and Senate (or a convention) and it's not valid until it's ratified by 3/4 of the states.

Not only was this process not followed but when it was ratified they were ratified as a requirement of having representation in government. Therefore it was coercive and no more legal than forcing someone to sign away their property with a gun in their mouth.

 

Is slavery evil...? Hmmm Is water wet?

 

Considering slavery has been dead in America for a century and a half, why is it worth discussing?

There is still slavery in Africa and in the Sandbox.

 

But you've changed the question from whether slavery is evil to whether slavery is comparatively better than murder.

And just lol at slavery being the morally high road. You guys keep pointing out that the North didn't care about the morality of slavery. Do you think these war tribes who enslaved people believed that taking slaves was morally better than killing them? Or do you think their motive was profit instead? It seems if you're going to say they had more than one objective in mind, then you have to concede the same for the North.

Can you be specific? Or is that the extent of your talking

Where did I argue that these were constitutional?

 

Of course slavery was wrong. I know I haven't said it wasn't. I just explained why I believe it was done. We look on it worse today than I'm sure they did back then, as slavery had been going on for years. But most defiantly it was wrong.

 

If the war was all about slavery as many people thought, why didn't the South take it? Surly Lincoln must of offered it to them.

Lincoln replied in an open letter to Greeley. In the letter, Lincoln emphasized his primary goal: “I would save the Union. … If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it. … What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union.” In this masterful message, Lincoln reaffirmed his support for abolition without apologizing for the pace of change, while also subtly preparing pro-slavery Union loyalists for the announcement to come.

Greeley printed Lincoln’s response — and his own response to Lincoln’s letter — in the Tribune. “Nothing was further from my thought than to impeach in any manner the sincerity or intensity of your devotion to the saving of the Union,” Greeley wrote. “That you may promptly and practically realize that Slavery is to be vanquished only by Liberty — is the fervent and anxious prayer.”

 

So even when your troll mask slips and you create a thread based on your own views, you still can't avoid strawman arguments. You must be pretty wimpy in a debate when you can only argue against arguments that you fabricate for your opponents.

 

I'm still loling so hard at that WARRIOR GENE comment. I showed it to all my liberal internet friends and they loved it.

 

Then we need to define what is evil.

Seeing as how they had been enslaving each other long before the white man started buying them, I don't think profit motive was the original intent.

Sure, they broke the Fugitive Slave Act (both of them) as well as Article 4 Section 2 Clause 3 of the united states constitution. And Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), was a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not be American citizens and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court,[2][3] and that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired after the creation of the United States.

You know what that bolded part means? It means that the states that were declared non-slave owning states should have been allowed to own slaves after that decision or at the very least allowed to vote and decide for themselves.

But that wasn't good enough for the North was it?

If they're not constitutional then they're invalid.

 

Evil? I have trouble sometimes applying that to something that is a part of human nature. And I'd say the things that come of slavery are what's truly evil. Fear, oppression, hatred, suffering, abuse, murder... things I would surely call evil.

And without ANY doubt whatsoever, the legacy that slavery has left America is full of the same evil components. Many of the attitudes and mindsets which led to and maintained slavery over the millennia, are surely with us today. The lamentable notion that one human should be allowed to dominate another in such a total manner, is evil also... many racists are afflicted with a similar mindset. And it is insidious, because many racists (not all) don't realize the extent of what ails them. In truth, spiritually-sourced LOVE and COMPASSION if they ever find or receive it in their hearts... is the only hope for them.

 

The OP should ask himself how a radical abolitionist like Lysander Spooner could consider slavery a great evil while at the same time opposing the north's war against the south. Both positions are based upon the same moral principles. Therefore, the question is: What is/are the moral principle(s) that lead one to conclude that slavery is evil? Answer that question and perhaps you will be able to better understand how one could object to the north's actions while not necessarily being a defender of slavery.

 

stealing a human being and forcing them into labor for no compensation, without any means of escape, is very evil.