Slavery in the 21st Century
2007 was the 200th anniversary of the abolition of slavery in the UK in 1807.
Slavery was abolished in the USA after the civil war in 1865
The aforementioned anniversay has been marked by public demonstrations, demands for apologies, compensation and considerable political activity around the subject. Again, amid all this activity I noticed discrepancies which made me think: "Hold on, things are not as they seem."
From a BBC site:
 |
Slavery can broadly be described as the ownership, buying and selling of human beings for the purpose of forced and unpaid labour. Slavery is one of the things that everyone agrees is unethical. |
Is it?
Not everyone agrees for a range of reasons:
The main assertions are thus:
1. American slavery gave the institution a bad name compared with slavery in ancient times. Slaves were beaten, transported and housed in appalling conditions and abused. You wouldn't do those things to a horse and you shouldn't do them to a slave. So a modern slave should live like an ancient slave, nurtured and rewarded when appropriate.
2. Statistically 5% of the population would be happy to be slaves voluntarily. They have a psychological need to be controlled. In the present day few have realized this and done something about it but the numbers are increasing.
3. Somewhere between the above cases are a class of slaves, I call them economic slaves who wish to escape poverty and voluntarily move into a situation which is slavery. If they are treated well it can work.
Apalling conditions
Slaves were brought over from Africa packed into ships like sardines. There were even diagrams given to captains to show how best to pack the slaves. Many died on the journey - a journey which would have been bad enough for a free person with the benefit of the best protection against the conditions at sea. This was one of the reasons for the abolition.Not long ago there was a lot of public outcry when it was discovered that animals such as pigs and hens were transported across Europe packed together in trucks in appalling conditions. The laws were changed as a result to protect the animals. The ownership of animals was not banned. Maybe the problem with slavery was the conditions and not the institution itself. Reading the account of Harriet Jacobs it is clear that her master was abominable. If he were alive today and treated horses as he treated his slaves he would be imprisoned. Of course the institution permitted the abuse but just as with animal rights today slaves could have had rights.
Another reason for abolition was the appalling conditions the slaves suffered at the hands of their owners. The Church is crictised for using slave labor to build cathedrals and churches. Compensation is demanded for this. However some accounts indicate that slaves owned by some churchmen were treated vary fairly. They were not paid but they were given accomodation which could have been better than the living conditions in Africa. Indeed many white servants were not paid either. 'Going into service' was considered a vocation.
In an account of the ships I noticed that the ships leaving England were 'laden with nothing but the means to barter' and I thought 'hang on, barter with whom?'. Many people assume that somehow the slave traders went to Africa, captured slaves and brought them back. They did not - they bought them from (black) African slave traders.
I wonder how many of them have heard of The Dahomey kingdom. This African kingdom expanded in the Benin-Nigeria area along military lines. It captured people from the territories around and enslaved them. It held regular sacrifices in which on holidays and special occasions thousands of slaves and prisoners of war were beheaded. They started selling their slaves to Europeans and did so for 300 years. So most of these slaves that arrived in Europe and America were already slaves. A substantial number of them had been spared being sacrificed or their descendants would not be around to complain today. The Dahomey were certainly not the only Africans to sell thousands of slaves to Europeans and Americans either. Perhaps the descendents of European slaves should be looking to the descendents of their African slavers for compensation.
Slavery in history
Since the dawn of civilisation slavery has been an accepted institution. The Jews were enslaved by the Egyptians. Ancient Britons were taken as slaves after the Roman conquest of Britain. If a nation were conquered it was automatic that some or all of its people would become slaves. Rome had slaves from all over its empire. Because slavery was accepted most slaves accepted their lot and made the best of it. Some in Greece or Rome became important resources in their households. I read one account where the son of a household is whipping a slave. Father finds out and is furious, and whips the boy.
The Romans often had Greek slaves. It must have been strange to the Greeks as a race superior in civilisation to the Romans. Greek slaves were highly regarded and often used as tutors for children of wealthy Roman households.
The Spartans had almost their entire economy run by slaves while the Spartans themselves organised themselves around sport and military skills, skills which were occasionally needed to supress slave uprisings.
The word 'slave' has a long history and traces back to the 'Slavs' of eastern Europe from which the Greeks obtained slaves. The word 'Welsh' is also reputed to mean slave since both the Celts and later the Saxons drew slaves from that western part of Britain.
Slavery in religion
From the Bible: “When you buy a Hebrew slave, six years shall he serve; and in the seventh shall he go out free, for nothing.” —Exodus 21:2-6."During that night he (Jacob) got up and gathered his two wives, his two slaves and his eleven children and crossed at the shallow part of the Jabbok River." (in most translations 'slave' is replaced by 'women-servants' or other euphemism.
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart.” —Ephesians 6:5-6.
From the Qur'an: “It is not lawful for you (to marry other) women after this, nor to change them for other wives even though their beauty attracts you, except those whom your right hand possesses. And Allah is Ever a Watcher over all things.” - Surah 33:52. 'those whom your right hand posseses is discussed elsewhere and includes slaves and prisoners of war.
It's clear that those two major religions at least were totally accepting of slavery as an institution but took steps to regulate their usage.
Slavery in archetypes
Slavery is an archetype buried deep in the human psyche. It is a natural and potentially healthy archetype for both slaves and Masters providing slaves are not abused, which is probably the real reason for abolition. Slaves appear often in stories and films. Star Wars: Leia becomes a slave to Jabba; the gifted Anakin Skywalker was a slave, freed by Qui Gon. Buck Rogers: Planet of the Slave Girls. Logan's run: Jessica who wears an ankh on her steel collar. Of course female slaves also imply the erotic. Male slaves exist in a different form, usually as exceptionally loyal servants to male or female characters.Modern Slavery
Now, as we all know, slavery is far from ended. Even in UK slavery persists. Women are brought from Eastern Europe thinking they are starting a new life but end up working as prostitutes. Money changes hands at Heathrow. They are bought and sold. This appalling practice must be stamped out as a matter of urgency. But many of the accusations of slavery in other parts of the world turn out not to be so much slavery after all, merely cheap or free labor. A TV news reporter visited a place in India where boys were working for free in poor conditions. From what I could understand the conditions were not all that bad. One boy was interviewed and he complained about conditions which did not amount to slavery in my view. Our philanthropic reporter reported this to the authorities who were not interested. He then 'rescued' a boy and took him to the authorities where they had to do something about it. The outcome was not clear but as far as I could surmise he ended up unemployed with no accommodation, no means of support and maybe a hundred dollars from the TV crew which would last him how long....?There seems to be a proportion of people who do not mind being servants. No-one wants to be abused of course but there is a section of humankind that can accept being slaves. These people are of the supine temperament (fifth temperament).
Extract: in the 1980s, the National Christian Counselors Association, Inc. founders Richard G. and Phyllis J. Arno.[7], after extensive research, identified a separate temperament, which they called Supine, which means “with the face upwards,” like a servant looking up to his/her master. The Arnos refer to it as “the serving temperament,” because the Supine “feels” that their only value is to serve others. Supines like and need people; however, they have a fear of rejection and do not initiate.
Supines are identified by strengths, such as a desire to serve, liking people, and having a gentle spirit. Their weaknesses include expecting others to read their mind (indirect behavior), harboring anger as "hurt feelings," and feelings of powerlessness. They are generally open to receiving affection, but have trouble initiating.
This temperament may be within a person to a lesser or greater extent, mixed with other temperaments. Of these a sizeable proportion would accept slavery as an institution. Moreover a proportion of this group actively seek slavery, both male and female. An even larger group would seek slavery if they knew that they could, that they had a psychological need for it and that it was socially acceptable. Slavery is not socially acceptable of course, but society is changing. There are now 94,000 registrations on the Slave Register. Young people especially are finding they fall easily into slave or Master/Mistress roles because they are more in contact with their archetypes.
Of course a great many people who might read this would respond that slavery is morally wrong. Morals are highly subjective and should be weighed against the golden rules that each religion posseses. Are they being harmed? If not then no moral judgement should be made.
More alternative views: The Myth of Global Warming
comments? write to webmaster.