http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S92fTz_-kQE&feature=g-u

Asking what you meant by sighing in text invalidates anything else I say? I think I’m being oppressed! Or you take yourself too seriously. Or something.

And “Wrong is wrong?” Is that supposed to be an argument? If so, it sounds like a religious one, at best (so it isn’t really an argument).

And then you go on to assert that the various arbitrary categories of forced labor are not the same (again without any actual argument supporting this view) so yet again I’d say that the net effect on the individuals caught up in such circumstances would reveal that the categories are for the most part arbitrary distinctions without relevant differences. Such distinctions serve the interests of those who profit from forced labor in any form at the expense of its victims as well as the interests of consumers who don’t want to think about where their shoes or whatever came from and that they might just share some of the responsibility for the abuses that make it possible to manufacture and sell so many consumer products relatively cheaply.

But of course I’m the one who should “tone it down.” After all, it’s not like people are suffering and dying right now, today thanks to living in inhumane conditions as forced laborers on a massive (almost “officially” massive) scale in many of the nations we trade with or anything, so there’s apparently no need to get a little strident towards those who are unintentionally complicit with modern slavery but who willfully delude themselves into feeling blameless because it isn’t official, State-sponsored “slavery,” eh?

I think it’s interesting that just about the only time the use of the word “slavery” is  considered acceptable and proper when describing contemporary contexts is in the case of “sex slaves” as that kind of forced labor is widely seen as egregiously evil and wrong. But it’s never been a Constitutionally-based form of slavery, so I guess they should be called “indentured sex servants” instead.

who can take you seriously after that?

you added nothing more than a drawn out dramatized revision of your previous commentary.

wrong is wrong.
Constitutional race based slavery and the various terms you’ve listed above are just NOT the same.

keep going. It won’t change.

The fact that you can’t even respond to my comment aside from with a non-sequitur about hall monitors doesn’t really help the case.  If you can point out any actual instances of oppressive attitudes, I’ll gladly give your opinion more thought.

And trying to use a word properly according to its definition is mere “semantics?” Hmm, well in any case we’re using words so semantics might just be important in such a context.

Frankly, it’s semantics that dilute this issue and harm the cause of ending slavery and related inhumane practices because almost all other terms for similar treatment don’t seem to inspire outrage or action at anywhere near the same level as “slavery.”

“Indentured servitude,” “sweatshop” or “prison labor,” and “human trafficking” do not carry anywhere near the same weight as “slavery” but those who’ve been subject to one of the apparently-lesser injustices would probably have a hard time seeing their treatment as being less inhumane than outright slavery.

 But hey, it’s just semantics; so congratulations, you’re not a slave! Now get back to work and finish your piecework on the 500 pairs of shoes you’re required to complete each day (a real quota in some shops, by the way) or you will be fined to the point where you’ll never be able to quit or take a day off (also a real -and common-scenario).

And I think what you’re referring to is human trafficking.. which  does exist.  and we are all aware of it. And it probably will exist as long as prostitution does. But Yes, constitutional race-based slavery IS in fact over in the US. you’re arguing over semantics at this point.

That’s not the same as claiming whites or other non-African races were enslaved on the wholesale, State-sponsored level that everyone apparently assumes everyone else is talking about when they mention the word, but members of every race were in fact enslaved in the U.S.. Many others were indentured servants (I know the difference, slight thought it often was).

And while slavery been outlawed, it has not been truly abolished yet (even here) so I’m always puzzled why people refer to it in the past tense. Is it easier for you to think of slavery as something that happened in the past rather than as a modern problem? That’s a common and misinformed sentiment, unfortunately.