All of this news about the slave-trading ship off the coast of Africa has got me wondering if any country still allows slavery legally. I’m not talking about a country where it is tolerated, but one where it is an officially legal thing.
I remember reading that Kuwait outlawed slavery in the 1960s. Is there any other country left to end this barbaric practice?
It better be ! What, with that nasty poison ivy I get each … Oh, you mean …
Had to do it 
:: shaking fist :: Damn You Oblio! I was just going to say, “I believe Salvery is legal EVERYWHERE…the question is…does it work.”
jarbaby
I’m pretty certain it’s still legal in the Sudan.
Slavery is IIRC illegal everywhere, but just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean it’s extinct. (In)Famously, some major American companies are in on the act, most notably The Gap
Sudan and Mauritania are the usual two examples of places where actual chattel slavery is still being practiced. It was outlawed in Mauritania in 1994, but watchdog groups say it still goes on. The situation in Sudan is murkier.
The Sudanese constitution, enacted in 1998, has language prohibiting slavery. And they are signatories to international human rights treaties forbidding slavery.
Nevertheless, Human Rights Watch claims that the Sudanese government is complicit in slavery:
Salvery was banned by all the signatories to the Geneva Convention Subsection on Salves, Ointments, and Unguents
If anyone is interested, relevant sites are
http://www.anti-slavery.org/
I think the military outlawed ben gay
Fully legal, government-sponsored slavery abounds in places such as Hungary, Belorussia, the United States of America, and countless other countries. Of course, it’s not known officially as “slavery” but rather “compulsory military service” or “the draft”.
What’s that? Not slavery, you say? Compulsory military service, where the inductee does not consent, is forced labour by definition. Every year millions of people around the world are held in servitude against their will in the name of “public service”. Just because the government sponsors it doesn’t make it legitimate.
And so, of course, we inevitably touch on the murky issue of what constitutes slavery. I rather suspect that the OP already knew of the existence of sweatshops and Selective Service, so that’s probably not what he had in mind in his question. Arken, could you perhaps provide us with a working definition to use in answering? In the meanwhile, while we’re waiting for him, can we perhaps make some reasonable guesses as to what he means, and restrict ourselves to that? I’d hate to have to close this thread or move it to GD.
Not to interrupt a fine hijack or anything, psychonaut, but the United States hasn’t had a draft in decades. However, for all I know, young Hungarians and Belorussians are being dragged into uniform as we speak, so carry on.
No, but you just can’t tell them you’re using it.
True, the US hasn’t actually forcibly slapped a uniform on anyone and shipped them off to war in a while, but the provisions are still in place. All men, once they reach the age of 18, are required to register with the government for military selective service. Failure to register is punishable by a fine of $250,000 and five years’ imprisonment. (I imagine the punishment for deserting is even worse – it’s a capital offence under the laws of most militaries.) Registration is also a prerequisite for student financial aid, government employment, naturalization, and various other niceties that many people otherwise take for granted.
Okay, I wasn’t trying to get political here. I meant slavery in the traditional sense of someone sold into labour without pay for the rest of their lives. People in sweatshops get paid and so do people in the military and yes, I know that the pay isn’t much, but that’s beside the point.
For references to the type of slaves I’m talking about, see history books about America pre-1860, Ancient Rome, Ancient Egypt, ect.
:rolleyes:
Our traditional view of slavery is either from the Antebellum American south, or from ancient Rome (depicted in films like “Gladiator” or Sparticus"). Keeping persons against their will and forcing them to perform manual labors is actually not very practical in industrialized nations. Even simple tasks in our society now involve skills training of some sort. For that reason, slavery tends to exist only in underdeveloped places like the Sudan. But it does exist.
And so far, no one has mentioned “white slavery,” which is the practice of abducting and holding women in prostitution; it is alive and thriving. Two years ago, ABC News Primetime did a story of how Russian girls were being promised jobs and opportunities in the West, then taken to the Mideast and forced to work as prostitutes to pay off their “transportation debts.” The same happens with Chinese girls who think they are going to be smuggled to freedom and end up in a Thailand brothel.
Not to reintroduce politics into the discussion, but slavery has always been a weapon of politics. In the ancient world, conquering nations routinely enslaved the populace of the losers; it was just the breaks of being on the losing side.
In the Twentieth Century, dissidents in the Soviet Union and other communist countries were commonly sent off to labor camps, slavery if there ever was any.
And then there is enslavement by the status quo, in which 51% of the populace vote to enslave the other 49%. Our Orwellian Newspeak term for this is “social democracy,” or “democratic socialism.” In China, you might hear it called “Asian Values.”
There are examples where the law forces people to work. To me, the distinction is that in slavery, their children are also forced to continue working.
You cannot be born or marry out of slavery. Once a slave, you and all of your children are slaves.
The only way out is for the people who own you [you are forced to work for] to let you or your children go.
To me that is the difference between being forced to work and slavery.
Where exactly do you draw the line? If I forcibly abduct someone (on pain of death, torture, imprisonment, or what-have-you) and put them to work without monetary compensation, that’s slavery, right? But if I give them a penny, or a dollar, or a thousand dollars, suddenly it’s not? I don’t think it’s “beside the point” at all. I think the issue of pay is irrelevant; most people would agree (particularly should it ever happen to them) that forcible abduction and forced labour are sufficient conditions for slavery.
As someone else already pointed out, in the capitalist system under which the entire world now operates, slavery in the manner you describe is not practical. Capitalists long ago discovered that you could get more work out of someone with a wage than a whip. Wages for mass labourers wouldn’t have worked in Ancient Egypt or Rome because the economy wasn’t sufficiently developed. Today the isolated pockets of wageless slavery are almost always found in less developed regions where capitalism has yet to firmly establish itself.
a relevant site: http://www.antislavery.org/selection.htm
I think the most relevant question is not of labor or pay, but of ownership. You and I can be said to own our own bodies. We have rights to determine what does or doesn’t happen to it (within certain limits - suicide and abortion being examples of areas where governments limits or attempts to limit these rights).
In slavery the slave cannot be said legally (IANAL) to own his or her own body, or anything produced by that body i.e. offspring.
This seems to be the deciding factor. In the antebellum South in the US some slaves were payed wages or worked in their own small businesses and were able to earn enough over many years to buy themselves and be freed.
Twiddle