Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Modern Day Slavery

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,856 ✭✭✭BalcombeSt4


    We are all slaves to our greasey capitalist employers.



    We should work because we want to work, not because we have to work.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 386 ✭✭Spider Web


    We are all slaves to our greasey capitalist employers.
    This really just takes the biscuit for deflection. It is downright disrespectful and insulting to the victims. Just read the following (from The Guardian rather than a newspaper with a right-wing bias):
    The victims, some of whom were homeless and/or had learning disabilities, were taken from the streets to work for the family’s tarmacking business. They were kept in caravans without running water or toilet facilities, while their captors wore Rolex watches, drove expensive cars and lived in homes that were “palatial in comparison” with their workers’ conditions, Spencer said.

    The threat of violence was “insidious and ever present” at the Rooneys’ site of Drinsey Nook, near Lincoln, he said, and their vulnerable victims were too afraid to speak out. One, whose ordeal lasted more than 25 years, was made to dig his own grave.

    A series of trials heard how the Rooneys targeted men who were homeless, alcoholics or had mental health problems, often finding them outside hostels or night shelters. Their victims, aged between 18 and 63, were lured with promises of work, money, shelter and food, the court heard.

    Once taken to Drinsey Nook, they were put up in “broken-down, ill-equipped and dirty” caravans without heating. They were then put to work laying tarmacked drives, “dawn to dusk, seven days a week in all weather” and usually without a break, and only rarely were they given food or drink, the judge said.
    If the above were about an operation run by, for instance, the catholic church, would you be so tasteless? Or what about the real life similar stories for migrant workers in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar?

    And no, we're not all slaves. Slavery means not being paid, having no rights, working in terrible conditions, working several hours beyond a standard working day. If capitalism is so terrible, stop buying goods, otherwise you're contributing to it.

    Orwell, much as I admire the man, left out the less than minor point that we need to have an income.
    Jesus Wept wrote: »
    Hardly. I wrote ten words. It doesn't cover all aspects of my view on the matter. I wasn't asked any questions.

    The abuse is deplorable, it pretty much goes without saying.
    The people flocking to the thread with glee to tar a group based on the actions of a few people who are attributed to said group is also deplorable. This however doesn't seem to go without saying.
    Well where do you draw the line? The problems that are disproportionately affecting traveller society won't go away by keeping quiet about them.

    Anyone who says there are absolutely no decent travellers is wrong - very wrong. Anyone, who dismisses that their upbringing shapes them, is wrong to do so.

    Otherwise though, concerns and criticisms are absolutely based in reality.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,856 ✭✭✭BalcombeSt4


    Spider Web wrote: »
    This really just takes the biscuit for deflection. It is downright disrespectful and insulting to the victims. Just read the following (from The Guardian rather than a newspaper with a right-wing bias):


    If the above were about an operation run by, for instance, the catholic church, would you be so tasteless? Or what about the real life similar stories for migrant workers in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar?

    And no, we're not all slaves. Slavery means not being paid, having no rights, working in terrible conditions, working several hours beyond a standard working day. If capitalism is so terrible, stop buying goods, otherwise you're contributing to it.

    Orwell, much as I admire the man, left out the less than minor point that we need to have an income.

    I can tell from your reply you obviously didn't watch the videos. And you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at.
    Since the chattel slave is property, his value to an owner is in some ways higher than that of a worker who may quit, be fired or replaced. The chattel slave's owner has made a greater investment in terms of the money he paid for the slave. For this reason, in times of recession, chattel slaves could not be fired like wage laborers. A "wage slave" could also be harmed at no (or less) cost. American chattel slaves in the 19th century had improved their standard of living from the 18th century and, according to historians Fogel and Engerman plantation records show that slaves worked less, were better fed and whipped only occasionally – their material conditions in the 19th century being "better than what was typically available to free urban laborers at the time". This was partially due to slave psychological strategies under an economic system different from capitalist wage slavery. According to Mark Michael Smith of the Economic History Society: "although intrusive and oppressive, paternalism, the way masters employed it, and the methods slaves used to manipulate it, rendered slaveholders' attempts to institute capitalistic work regimens on their plantation ineffective and so allowed slaves to carve out a degree of autonomy."
    Unlike a chattel slave, a wage laborer can (barring unemployment or lack of job offers) choose between employers, but they usually constitute a minority of owners in the population for which the wage laborer must work, while attempts to implement workers' control on employers' businesses may be considered an act of theft or insubordination, and thus be met with violence, imprisonment or other legal and social measures. The wage laborer's starkest choice is to work for an employer or face poverty or starvation. If a chattel slave refuses to work, a number of punishments are also available; from beatings to food deprivation – although economically rational slave owners practiced positive reinforcement to achieve best results and before losing their investment by killing an expensive slave.
    Historically, the range of occupations and status positions held by chattel slaves has been nearly as broad as that held by free persons, indicating some similarities between chattel slavery and wage slavery as well.
    Wage slavery, like chattel slavery, does not stem from some immutable "human nature," but represents a "specific response to material and historical conditions" that "reproduce the inhabitants, the social relations… the ideas… [and] the social form of daily life."
    Similarities were blurred by the fact that proponents of wage labor won the American Civil War, in which they competed for legitimacy with defenders of chattel slavery. Both presented an over-positive assessment of their system, while denigrating the opponent.

    According to American anarcho-syndicalist philosopher Noam Chomsky, the similarities between chattel and wage slavery were noticed by the workers themselves. He noted that the 19th century Lowell Mill Girls, who, without any reported knowledge of European Marxism or anarchism, condemned the "degradation and subordination" of the newly emerging industrial system, and the "new spirit of the age: gain wealth, forgetting all but self", maintaining that "those who work in the mills should own them."


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,808 ✭✭✭✭Esel
    Not Your Ornery Onager


    ^ Presume you didn't mean to use strike-through there?

    Not your ornery onager



Advertisement
Advertisement