Slavery

[Alcon]

I am just curious to see if anyone actually answers this something other than "No."

I encourage anyone who votes #1-4 to explain wy.

[Tory]

Of course it was! It was fabulous having all those dirty little jungle bunnies do our work for us.

[A18]

No, I don't consider the income tax to have been a good thing.

[Alcon]

No, I don't consider the income tax to have been a good thing.

Income tax? What?

I do hope that you are not attempting to compare the income tax to slavery.

[Tory]

No, I don't consider the income tax to have been a good thing.

Income tax? What?

I do hope that you are not attempting to compare the income tax to slavery.

Is it just me or have the conservatives on this board swung drastically to the right economically as of late?

[A18]

I'm from the Coolidge/Reagan/Bush wing of the Republican Party.

[Nation]

That's just Philip and Richius, Tory.

[A18]

StatesRights is also against the income tax.

[J-Mann]

For once, maybe we could keep this on topic.  Alcon was talking about having Africans used as slaves in this and other countries.  I've never experienced anything close to slavery by paying an income tax; it's a stupid comparison.

[7,052,770]

~yeah, man, slavery's awesome!~

[??????????]

Option 4.

[Tory]

Option 4.

I hope you aren't serious.

[Alcon]

The fact that half the people here find good aspects to slavery bewilders me.

[7,052,770]

The fact that half the people here find good aspects to slavery bewilders me.

well I sarcastically voted for option 1 to go with my sarcastic reply.

the ~'s imply sarcasm.

[??????????]

Option 4.

I hope you aren't serious.

Yes their definately were good aspects to slavery. The main one being free labor. I don't advocate re-institution of slavery or anything but their are good aspects to it.

[Tory]

The fact that half the people here find good aspects to slavery bewilders me.

I was being sarcastic with my outrageous statements.

[Alcon]

The fact that half the people here find good aspects to slavery bewilders me.

I was being sarcastic with my outrageous statements.

Yes, I know; I'm referring to the poll.

[J-Mann]

I suppose I can see States' point about their being beneficial aspects to it.  From a strictly economic aspect, there were benefits for the slave owners.  Also, it was a different time, and being an historian myself I have a hard time applying today's politically correct beliefs to peoples of the past.  That said, slavery was a horrible abomination and has harmed the African-American community to this day.  They're still struggling with its legacy.

[Gabu]

I suppose I can see States' point about their being beneficial aspects to it.  From a strictly economic aspect, there were benefits for the slave owners.  Also, it was a different time, and being an historian myself I have a hard time applying today's politically correct beliefs to peoples of the past.  That said, slavery was a horrible abomination and has harmed the African-American community to this day.  They're still struggling with its legacy.

I suppose it depends on what you define as "good aspects".  If having a good aspect means that it benefitted someone, then yes, it did have good aspects.

It would be very, very hard to make any kind of argument in favor of slavery, however.  It was easily one of the top ten worst stains on human history.

[The Duke]

There are good aspects only if you owned slaves.

Overall, the economic benefit was negative, as a large chunk of the population was denied economic equal opportunity.

[2952-0-0]

There are good aspects only if you owned slaves.

We all agree, but that's like saying killing your parents to get their inheritance is also good, if they were rich.

[Gabu]

There are good aspects only if you owned slaves.

We all agree, but that's like saying killing your parents to get their inheritance is also good, if they were rich.

Well, that too would have a good aspect to it.  Everything has both good and bad aspects to it.  It's just that your example, like slavery, has a lot more bad aspects to it than good ones.

[opebo]

Good for the owner, bad for the slave.

But really, hiring people is probably a slightly better deal all round for the owner - easier in terms of management (one's beating arm can get quite sore), also not so many chains, whips, shacks and other overhead.

With hiring they just go away, build their own little shacks, and show up every morning *trying* to work hard for promoation, etc.   
Its like a whole workforce of House N-----s.

[dazzleman]

The fact that half the people here find good aspects to slavery bewilders me.

Me too, though now it's less than half.

[dazzleman]

Option 4.

I hope you aren't serious.

Yes their definately were good aspects to slavery. The main one being free labor. I don't advocate re-institution of slavery or anything but their are good aspects to it.

I guess if you're the one getting the free labor, it's a good aspect, but if you're the one providing free labor, while being beaten and having your family sold, then I guess it's a different matter.

I think the term good aspect is supposed to mean that it advances the overall good, not simply the good of one side of the transaction.  That's like saying robbery has good aspects because the robber gets money.