Talk:Slavery/Archive 1

message: Additions for 19 October, 2006
For anyone wondering the web site logged me out while the page I was reading showed I was logged in. So the extensive external links I added were not added under my name. They are specifically the links to the BBC and Anti-slavery International
I have added these links since there is an apparent problem with balance (I am not saying it is intentional) but there seems to be a bias of an anti-American and anti-Christian nature. Nevertheless, without pointing fingers, I have added these links to show:
A. Prevalence in the world today;
B. Widespread incidence of the problem;
C. Variations in the defintion of "slavery.
Apologies for any inconvenience.
Malangthon 04:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here are the best websites I've found about child slavery (or labor).  Do you want to add them to the article?  http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/IRchild.htm  And another:  http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAchild.htm  If so, could you add it, because I don't know how or where to add it.  Thanks.  Also, please read the second one closely about USA child labor.  Notice the ages, working hours, hands cut off, etc, & don't you think we should call it "child slavery in USA in 20th century?"  Sundiiiaaa 18:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you need to talk to your doctor about increasing your meds. To keep insisting that there is child slavery in the US, and to talk about "hands cut off", is fringe stuff, right up there with Elvis sightings. You know, Tin foil hats do wonders for the mind control rays. You should look into them. -- Dullfig 21:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, this website does call it slavery of children in the USA in 1906 & 1908.  See # (4) & # (12).  http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAchild.htm   Look how hard it was to "end child labor/slavery" too.  Now don't you think we could change the heading to "Child slavery in USA in 20th century?"  Maybe that will help end the capitalist wage system worldwide, starting in USA, since all work is slavery & employees are slaves.  Or am I in big trouble again?  Sundiiiaaa 18:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links 

message: I find that many sections of this article run afoul of Wikipedia's policies of Neutral Point of View and Verifiability, particularly the sections on Chattel Slavery, Most common types of work, and Punishments.  I don't doubt the claims made in this section, but I find them poorly referenced and heavily opinionated.  I have a deep hatred of slavery, but I think that presenting the topic from such a biased point of view can only hurt the argument against it.  I believe in a person's basic ability to recognize injustice when it is reported in a factual way.  I think, as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should be above making a judgement call on a topic like this, and simply supply as much verifiable information as possible.
-Hellsjester 20:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Wiki Policies 

message: can anyone provide the greek word in Greek
SLAVES WERE BOUGHT AND SOLD in exchange FOR SALT  
eg: "BOUGHT in exchange for salt" 
sal....=[latin] salt 
 SALARIUM [latin] = payment
 
 "HALOONETEI" [greek] = SLAVE -eg: BOUGHT FOR SALT 
hal....[greek]=salt --62.0.74.137 21:14, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ETYMOLOGY of slave slavery 

message: This series has a gaping hole; only slavery of antiquity and the early modern period are discussed, leaving out a good 1000 years of slavery.  Kemet 14:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medieval and Premodern Slavery 

message: It is clear, to me anyway, that the article is seriously abbreviated. Updating my own files I found the following:
http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/China.htm
Human Trafficking & Modern-day Slavery
U.S. State Dept Trafficking in Persons Report, June, 2005
People’s Republic of China                                      [ Country-by-CountryReports ]
The Peoples’ Republic of China is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and sexual exploitation. 
http://www.antislavery.org/homepage/news/china130801.htm
Slave labour on the increase in China
13 August 2001
Young Chinese men are increasingly becoming victims of forced labour as economic necessity forces them to migrate to other provinces in China where they have been promised well paid jobs in brick factories or stone quarries.
http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/NorthKorea.htm
Human Trafficking & Modern-day Slavery
U.S. State Dept Trafficking in Persons Report, June, 2005
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea                      
[ Country-by-Country Reports ]
(North Korea)
The Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is a source country for men and women trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and sexual exploitation. Thousands of North Koreans, pushed by deteriorating conditions in the country, become economic migrants who are subjected to conditions of debt bondage, commercial sexual exploitation, and/or forced labor upon arrival in a destination country, most often the People’s Republic of China (P.R.C.). 
http://www.feer.com/breaking_news/010808a.html
Far Eastern Economic Review
SLAVERY ON THE RISE IN CHINA
Hong Kong, August 8, 2001--Slavery is on the rise in China as migration flows grow and private business blossoms, but Beijing appears unwilling and unable to prevent it, the Far Eastern Economic Review reports in its August 16 issue, available tomorrow.
http://www.asiantribune.com/show_article.php?id=2490
Asian Tribune
Date : 2005-06-19
Of Slaves and Bonded Labours
By Tushar Charan - Syndicate Features
. . . Chinese authorities treat their jails as some sort of correction homes for the ‘bad elements’, especially those who have a ‘mind problem’, and they are turned into ‘new socialist persons’ after some compulsory hard labour in prisons. 
This process of ‘re-education’, which can continue out of jail too, requires 12 to 14 hours of physical labour, all seven days of the week and recalcitrant prisoners are thrashed into submission. No visitors are allowed to meet the prisoners.
It seems clear to me as well as to many of us here that the article will have to be broken up into many categories if it is to present even a modicum of the evidence and the range of the disussion and not exceed size restrictions.
Thom Simmons, Kapiti Coast, NZ --Malangthon July 11, 2005
::I agree it seems a daunting task but it needs to be done.  --Rakista 17:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slavery in China 

message: The South Asia section does not indicate the extent to which the larger network of Islamic slave traders was present in South Asia. Given the number of Islamic kingdoms, especially the Mughual Empire, it had to be present to a degree, but what degree?  Were Indian slaves circulating throughout the routes, were African slaves coming to India? Jztinfinity 23:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islamic slave trade in South Asia 

message: From the Mediterranean: Undoubtedly a majority of slaves were condemned to agricultural labor and lived hard lives.  This seems to refer to the Roman latifundia, but from what I know, Greek slaves tended to be urban, with poorer citizens tilling the lands themselves outside of Sparta.  Being a slave is never fun, especially if you happen to be female, yet again I don't think the treatment was that much worse than slaves received in America (relative to the well-being of the average citizen) and that did not seem to merit a comment.  The strong exception to this were those slaves sentenced to work in mines, who in Greece and indeed all the Mediterranean and ancient world pretty much had to be worked to death in order to make mining profitable.
-----
I guess I was inserting the 'hard life' line to avert criticism that by talking about manumission I was glossing over the lot of the slave.  Manumission was a promise that never came for a majority.  On the subject of Rural slavery, Greek small farming depended on slavery as well, though admittedly on a smaller scale than latifundia.  In fact, I shudder to suggest it, but American slaveholding was one of the few that came even close to successful internal re-supply rather than depending on debt-slavery and foreign war to keep restocking the system.  Slave smuggling existed in the 1830s-50s, but it was relatively minor, and the number of slaves were not falling.  Lots of economic arguments about social change in the ancient 
world depend on boom&bust cycles of slave supply. --MichaelTinkler
To my knowledge, there really isn't any religious or cultural group that hasn't been slaves to someone at some point, but I'm not too sure. --Jzcool
--------
I notice a link to "psychiatric slavery": Hello, central, get me doctor Szasz! The Anome
:Are you disputing/can you dispute Szasz' position or do you think this should be explained within the article? --Daniel C. Boyer
--------
This is rather sparse. No mention of the Romans or Greeks who employed slaves or the Egyptians who were a huge slave society, most famously the accounts in the Bible of enslaving the Jews. There should be more empahsis on antiquity in the history section. --deadmissbates 11 Dec 2005
Agreed. Absolutely. And where is discussion of the slavery of both fellow Hebrews and foreign Canaanites in the Israelite legal system? Considering how many of Wiki's users are probably from a Jewish or Christian background, this subject really ought to be given some treatment. I haven't checked other articles today, but don't recall any discussion in Tanakh, Bible, Ancient Israel, or other articles. Anyone with expertise, Please help. 66.108.4.183 19:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slavery In Ancient Mediterranean 

message: :In 1806 the United States passed legislation that banned the importation of slaves ... The importation of slaves into the United States was banned on January 1, 1808.
So which is it?  Was it banned in 1806 or in 1808?  Somebody needs to make up their mind....  --Michael 21:15 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
:The bill was introduced in 1805, debated through 1806 and signed into law March 2, 1807. It could not go into effect because of restrictions in the Constitution until Jan 1 1808. Rmhermen 21:42 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
----
I am now watching a show, "Globe Trekker," which says that "the slave trade was abolished in 1865." I think this is a gross error, confusing the end of the U.S. Civil War with the end of the importation of slaves into the U.S. which (IIRC was in 1808, but I do not guarantee this. I think that this needs to be pinned down, not only for the date for importation of slaves into the U.S., but also because the slave trade was abolished in British law also about the same date (may be later or earlier, I don't know). There is nothing in this article that really addresses the issue of when the slave trade ended, versus when slavery was officially abolished in various jurisdictions. 
So my suggestions are: There needs to be a section that addresses the abolition of the slave trade, (legally, of course, since it still continues in fact in the world), and (in reference to the Globe Trotter episode I am watching), what this really means. Bill Jefferys 03:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slavery in USA 

message: I read somewhere that slaves in the US South lived better than (free black?) industrial workers in the North. Can somebody deal with it? -- Error
And I've heard that blacks are better off in the US after being forcibly enslaved from their homeland. But so help me, if someone is willing to put that in there a few hundred people here will line up to kick their butts.
Sorry Error, that's my sarcastic way of saying: No. Not only is that unqualifiable by reliable sources it is often a point of emotional contention between revisionists and historians.
--Duemellon 14:55, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Blacks living in America

message: I removed this sentence from the first paragraph:
:It predates every institution of ownership and authority, and its definition has changed over time to reflect those institutions in every society.
How is it that slavery predates the institution of property?  This does not seem provable one way or the other, and to me seems unlikely at best.  Tempshill 18:56, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Predates every institution of ownership

message: I wanted to add some stuff but I'm thinking the majority of this page needs to be put in separate articles. In particular I think there needs to be full article on the slavery of blacks in the U.S. pointing out the difference between it and the other kinds of slavery discussed in this article. Gbleem 19:07, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Spliting the page up

message: I deleted the following because of its POV-ness:  RickK 05:21, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
:Some of it may be added in a more NPOV way, at least if some reference is given, but I'm not shure the heading is appropriate since there are other "modern instances of slavery" mentioned elsewhere in the text, such as in Brazil and Africa. --Dittaeva 07:45, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: But Roman galleys were rowed by free paid labor. Ben Hur got it wrong.Septentrionalis 18:35, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Why I reverted

message: Modern Slavery does not officially exist in traditional sense. However it continues indirectly by legal justification through rigid and even longer prison sentences, wherein prisoners are used as cheap labour across the world. The abolishing of the term slavery and its denouncement in official declaration has created an idea that slavery is an idea of the past. However despite linguistic masking the use of man power as free or cheap labour is the principle aspect of slavery under servitude.    
   
In the United States there are around 2 million people serving sentence in prisons. This is a large man power for cheap work for industries. Prison industrial complex is a thriving business in the U.S. In fact the largest prison operator in the U.S. is called the Correction Corporations of America. Many large corporations use cheap labour form these prisons and thus boost the economy. It is therefore not coincidental that with the rise of corporate economy, people all over the world have inclined towards more rigid and very long prison sentences for those who previously would have returned much earlier to the society as free citizens. In India the official minimum daily wage for a free citizen is around Rs 50 a day. This was constituted for a working day of 8 man hours. In prisons however the inmates have to work from morning 6 a.m. to evening 7 p.m. and the daily wage for 13 hours of labour is Rs 5 per day. (which is one tenth of a U.S. dollar).   
  
In practice, there is not much difference between the ancient Romans using slaves and convicted prisoners as galley slaves in ancient warships called as Trireme, and modern nations using prison labour as cheap industrial resource. Therefore, it could be argued that in modern times since the end of British colonialism, slavery has become a legalized activity, legitimized by the governments and public through prison system.
:But Roman galleys were rowed by free paid labor. Ben Hur got it wrong.Septentrionalis 18:35, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Instances of Slavery

message: Hi Pir,
You left a message on my user talk. Thanks for your words. The passage dealing with prison and slavery for the article on slavery was written based on a very strong movement across countries which most people call as prison slavery. 
The movement is strong in Britain and other parts of the world. So one cannot state that it is nonsense to say that prisons use slave labour, regardless of whether it is called as that. Besides the argument that the cost of prisons is higher than the work they do, implies that the public at large approves it.
Here are a few links, some of which are more neutral than others. However you can go through all of them, to get a complete view of the validity of the term and its current social context. 
http://www.thewinds.org/1996/12/modern_slavery.html (prison slavery in the United States)
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/mt/mt11labor.html (maoists international movement against prison slavery)
http://www.enrager.net/hosted/caps/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=241 (campaign against prison slavery in Britain)
http://www.prisonactivist.org/crisis/labor-of-doing-time.html (essay on prison slavery by Julie Brown)
http://www.geocities.com/youth4sa/prisonlabor.html (prison slave labour factories)
http://www.antislavery.org/homepage/news/china130801.htm (slave labour on increase in China)
http://www.clearharmony.net/articles/200406/20434.html (slave labour in china's forced labour camps)
http://www.veggies.org.uk/news/bullet04a.htm ( forced slave labour in Britain)
Deleting a text because it could be controversial is but the greatest threat to the very idea of a wikipedia. There are several other high quality encyclopedias in the world that are well researched and well written. However these hard copies being official versions leave out a lot of controversial topics and also have to take a lot of permissions from several sovereign states for official approval. The wikipedia is meant to be a repository of knowledge which otherwise would never have been expressed or known, without of course being compromised on authenticity. Else the wikipedia would turn out to be just another official version, and that would be a classic example of the waste of time of literally millions of people around the world.
Deleting a passage because it is not conforming to the official view is the worst form of POV and vandalism. In that several wikipedians engage in, without being realized and ironically even commended for it instead of being condemned for it. The issue here is pervasive and far reaching, and therefore such deleting should be stopped.
Since you stated that in your opinion my passage was a worthy contribution to the article. I would please implore you to add whatever you feel is relevant and of NPOV. You can go through whatever had been written and the links that have been posted here, and maybe write an even better passage on the relevant topic and with a more NPOV content.
----
Are the arguments that we do not want POV statements concerning the definition of slavery so that modern (e.g. CCA) practices fall under this definition? Or is it desired the (non-neutral) POV be balanced by an a;termative NNPOV that shows how CCA helps the prisons, prisoners, society, and the economy (in addition to aiding the democratic political process through massive contributions to candidates) - I'm sure CCA could provide material supporting that viewpoint. Alternatively, that portion of the article could be salted with lots of weasle words.Leonard G. 21:11, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prisons and forced Slave labour 

message: Added a reference to the Middle Passage in the Slavery in Africa.
--Duemellon 14:08, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Middle Passage

message: The fiercest combatants were abolitionists and the slaves themselves against an array of planters in the South and pro-slavery shipping interests in the East,
The abolitionists weren't all fighters. Most were pacifists. The war was between the Union & Secessionists, not abolitionists & slaveholders. That 2nd set of titles was secondary & not always true. Perhaps I'm misreading this sentence, and if so, please add additional clarity. --Duemellon 12:19, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Slavery in North America

message: I wanted to include a list of famous people who were enslaved at some point. I really like those being included in articles as it gives an opportunity to understand what happened in their time
:Frederick Douglas, African-American slave turned abolishinist
:Spartacus, Roman slaves who led the Servile Revolt?
:Harriet Tubman, 
:Nat Turner, escaped and led revolt
etc. etc... Such would be apprapo right?
--Duemellon 13:37, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Famous People in Slavery 

message: I just think it's amusing that the article both propounds and repudiates the theory of an etymological connection between "slave" and "Slav'. DS 17:54, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: Why aren't there any positive aspects of slavery discussed?
:Such as? Profits for their owners? Grant65 (Talk) 02:37, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
::They may not be as prominent today, but slavery has had its apologists. There is the white man's burdern argument that about lifting the backwards tribemen into civilization, and how they are better off in civilization then as savages. You can also argue American slavery successfully converted people to Christianity, if you assume that is a good thing. You can also argue that they would've died without help, and the humble slave owner took them in, and gave them a place in life. Slaves are able to part of something bigger than themselves. 
::Also, I think you can argue that, slaves are only replaced by mindless machines. If you agree with Ted Kazynski, I suppose you could argue slavery would be a better alternative. (from 128.151.93.98)
:POWs were not converted to another 'useable form', food for example, but sold instead to slave traders, so some lucky laiter regained freedom.
Riiiiiight.  Mr. Billion 18:10, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Positive Aspects? 

message: I'm a bit confused by the latest  edit - why is it only  mention of bad working conditions in the USA that need to be cited? Don't the other countries needed need citations if one does? sheridan 15:39, 2005 Jan 7 (UTC)
:One would also be needed for Canada, and there is a link there.  Also, it isn't just bad working conditions, there must also be a lack of rights and effective recourse to enforce them.  I can't question the other countries, because I am unfamiliar with them, although I've heard they have these problems, I don't recall the details.  I assume good faith on those that added them.  I question the USA addition because I don't know what was meant by it.  They may not have had something specific in mind.  Since I am familiar with the USA and Canada, I question these without documentation.  Documentation also lessens generizations with specifics, a form of qualifying.  Also, I was monitoring the page when the USA was added, and not when the others were.  Since they have been on the page for awhile, they may already have gone through a vetting process, that I have not familiarized myself with, since I haven't reviewed the archives.--Silverback 15:54, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I find both of these doubtful; but I have not read all of Chrysostom - few have. There is a strong tendency for modern Christian biographers to read  any saint who pleads for decent conduct within a system as intending its abolition. Septentrionalis 02:38, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that Patrick was an escaped slave, I wonder why his opposition to the practice is doubted.  As to whether he was the first - I just don't know.  --ClemMcGann 09:36, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

text: Because his writings (in Wikisource) show that he was opposed to the slave trade, especially the enslavement of free Christians - but this is not abolition of slavery. Septentrionalis 02:30, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Celtic Christians did not own slaves.  Within a generation, slavery, in Ireland, ceased.  If they didn't get that idea from Patrick, where did it come from? --ClemMcGann 08:41, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation

message: A big chunk of this appears to be from the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge
§ 48. Christianity and Slavery.. Public domain, apparently. --Dhodges 06:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slavery in Rome and Greece 

message: AFAIK it was widely possible in Russian to trade 'serfs' with no relation to land. Hystorcally it was serfdom but gradually (beginning in the last quarter of XVII) the 'serfdom' evolutioned to something pretty close to slavery. How that correction could be accomodated to the structure of the article? --GS 14:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serfdom in Russia 

message: AFAIK (I am not an historian) the reintroduction of serfdom in Eastern Europe was caused by some economical reasons, the same reasons which caused existence of slavery in both Americas. I am not quite sure that was the reasons, something like presence of world wide (?) market for some agricultural products. At least I'd like to see better explanation of slavery as economical phenomenon. --GS 16:45, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second edition of serfdom 

message: "slaves in Athenian Democracy had the free speech right,"
The text of pseudo-Xenophon cannot be construed  so as to support this statement. Is it original research or is it simply a misunderstanding of the force of English right? Septentrionalis 19:43, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: free speech right? and other Greek questions

message: The section on Japan is grossly inadequate at present; in fact it's almost a whitewash. It stops with the supposed "abolition" of slavery in Manchuko, which is bit like finishing a history of Nazi Germany with the building of the autobahns! Hundreds of thousands of people were used as slave labour by the Empire of Japan in 1937-45, if not earlier. I intend to mention this. Grant65 (Talk) 00:32, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
:I have made this an own article. Now there is a link to it, not a developed section.
Sarcelles 09:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Japan

message: This section is both POV, and misspelled with bad grammar. For example this section is POV:
Caribbean slavery granted the masters complete freedom over the control of their slaves. Caribbean slaves often worked on cane estates suffering hardship in harsh conditions and supervised under demanding masters. The sugar industry caused the need for the complete control the master needed over the slaves in order to meet demands and control the harvest. Caribbean sugar plantations resembled factories in a modern capitalist society..
So what it is saying is that conditions in factories in the western world is equal to that of slaves in the Caribbean? 
--Konstantin 08:28, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The status of African slaves compared to Caribbean slaves 

message: It seems to me that slavery is an institution or an idea whereby one person owns another. That the first thing said about slavery in this article is that it can be "enforced by violence or other forms of coercion" is like saying "marriage can mean one or more related conditions which involve two people in a committed relationship, often kept in such a condition for disfunctional reasons such as spousal abuse" at the top of the article on marriage. While that is true and marriages that stay together because of disfunctional reasons and it could be mentioned, it shouldn't be the first thing mentioned. The perspective on slavery from the perspectives of the authors of wikipedia (predominantly americans), are highly influenced by emotionally-charged instances of extreme abuse associated with the atlantic slave trade and souther plantations, whereas such abuse isn't inherent in the ownership of another person. Slave abuse must be mentioned but it should not be implied that abuse is definitive or necessary in slavery. Johnathlon 08:12, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one ever objected to either Johnathlon's or Myron's comments, I'm going to change the introduction to reflect them. Binabik80 14:13, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Definition 

message: Michael White's website makes a point about the current entry being much worse than the previous one. Is there a reason not to revert to the original text? Was something inaccurate?
"The Muslim Arab World also traded in slavery, especially with the Byzantine Empire. These consisted of Turkic and Circassian males from northern Black Sea regions who were enlisted into the army. This soldier class was named Mamelukes and were mainly responsible for the expulsion of the Crusaders from Palestine. Officially, Islam dislikes the idea of slavery and had set rules for dealing with slaves, such as mandated liberation on conversion to Islam, an insistence that slaves be clothed and fed in the same manner as is their master, and that they not be forced into marriage, among other prohibitons. Slavery was abolished in Saudi Arabia in 1962, making it one of the last countries to ban this practice."
 --Goodoldpolonius2 22:28, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See whether the hadiths cited do not include such a point, and then be bold. Septentrionalis 23:10, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Slavery in Islam

message: I'm going to remove the reference to marriage in the first paragraph. Marriage is not associated with slavery in any conventional way. If someone has an axe to grind by comparing the two I'm not going to complain about an entry in the body of the page, but trying to link the two in the first paragraph which should define what slavery is is not appropriate. PeteVerdon 22:43, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage 

message: We now have a situation where the section on the USA represents about 25% of the article. Considering that chattel slavery in North America lasted from 1619 until the end of the Civil War, we are spending a lot of space on 250 years of human history, when slavery is thousands of years old and is still going on. I feel that most of the North American content could be moved to Slavery in Colonial America and History of slavery in the United States, in the same way that other sectiosn have been hived off. Any objections? Grant65 (Talk) 13:15, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:Sounds good to me, but I'm an outside observer. - RoyBoy 800 15:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Overemphasis on the USA

message: There were no good apects of slavery,regardless of how long slavery was around before america is a moot point, if slavery were a good thing then you wouldnt have too kidnap ,people would be in line to sign up,they would voulenteer.and u wouldnt need violence too enforce it,it is a natural human state not too be in servitude,and america was well aware of that at the time,all of those innocent people women,childeren who caused noone any harm millions of people human beings dead for no reason,and yes still today, all that human potential reduced to just physical labor,it makes me sick thinking about it, i think its time for america too face the facts we werent a democracy until 1964(civil rights movement).   
----
DPJ
----
We were a democracy, we were just a limited one.  69.112.90.243
Someone w some historical experience w the subject of slavery needs to do some research.  I am personally aware (only from general reading) that there were several cultures where it was possible (common?) to sell yourself into slavery.  The advantages might be a big chunk of money to get out of debtor's prison or get off of death row.  It might make it possible for your children to eat for the next 10 years.  In addition, in some cultures the slave of a smart generous businesslike master was better off than the free man w no land and no prospects.
Comments please ????????67.174.53.196 23:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOOD ASPECTS OF SLAVERY? 

message: There are only two kinds of soldiers: mercenaries (aka as volunteers) and slaves (aka conscripts), janissaries were special because they were very young slaves trained from a very early age to form an elite fightingh unit.
Since when soldiers are considered as slaves? There are many soldiers around the world that are drafted without wanting to go there, lives under quite hard conditions and truly war is quite bad. Yet, are they slaves ?
Then most of the soldiers of this world are slaves. Such as American soldiers in Iraq that supports troups to go back home are slaves as well. Or even all countries that obliges their citizens (including women in some cases) to serve in the army treats them as slaves.
Sure, the draft is slavery. How can you even doubt it? Surely you don't think when it is done by Ugandan rebels to 13 year olds it is kidnapping and slavery, but if it is done by Napoleon (or whomever you find more respectable...) then it's something else.--Flix2000 17:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course they were: property of the Caliph himself. Mamelukes were also slaves. Septentrionalis 16:25, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not all soldiers are slaves, but some slaves, like the Mamluk and the Janissaries, made very good soldiers. Bill 17:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Janissaries were slaves? 

message: (In response to a recent edit, that I reverted.) It was not Europeans who took slaves from North Africa, but North Africans who took slaves from Europe, thru various means, usually by piracy on the high seas The North Africans spent several centuries taking Christian slaves from Europe, and 17‑19c literature is replete with references to it, of which maybe the most famous is Molière's "Que diable est‑il allé faire dans cette galère ?". It's what the Barbary Pirates Wars were fought about; and, far earlier, was a contributing factor to the Crusades. Bill 17:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Direction of slave traffic

message: Hi, I came here looking for an article related to Abolitionist movement.  I think this article is good enough to be a featured article or nearly good enough with bit of photo there and bit of copy editing. At least, it has a right structure. Why hasn't anyone nominated this page? FWBOarticle10100 10001011010 010100011111010101000100110011
100100100111010101010101010101 0 01101 01 1001 01 10 m1 1010101010101 01 01 10 011 10 10 101010
I disagree.  This article has some serious problems.  Check out the section Effects of Slavery.  Some of the typos and problems have been fixed, but others persist.  This section has an over-emphasis on slavery in the U.S.  Nobody seriously doubts that slavery has existed for thousands of years and still exists today, yet this section focuses on a 250-year period of slavery in the U.S.  Does that answer your question of why this article has not been nominated to be a Featured Article?  Hildenja 05:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured Article Status

message: The issue of slavery is recurrent from Plato on (though there's obviously some thoughts on it before Plato, just few preserved). It becomes a major theme in Aristotle's work (where slavery is justified through teleology, though there's  quite a bit of hand-waiving about it), through Augustine and Aurelius. It becomes a major issue again during the Enlightenment, and Hegel's treatment of slavery becomes one of the canonical philosophical arguments of the last two hundred years, with responses from Heidegger and Sartre (among others). I'd like to see this all discussed, though I wouldn't have time to write anything on it for quite some time. Any philosophy/polisci majors/grad students wanna take a swing at it? It would add a lot to the page, even if I don't have time to write it. --68.43.124.83 06:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slavery in Philosophy 

message: I am a bit confused about the etymology of the word slave. Though most articles rely on the standard theory that "slave" derives from "Slav", there seem to be different interpretations why. The OED cites the reputable scholar Richard Klein: "This sense development arose in the consequence of the wars waged by Otto the Great and his successors against the Slavs, a great number of whom they took captive and sold into slavery." The French Wikipedia article claims that the word originates in Venice during the High Middle Ages because of enslaved Slavs from the Balcans (une région qui s'est longtemps appelée « Esclavonie » et qui est récemment devenue indépendante, sous le nom de « Slovénie »), whereas Slavery in medieval Europe declares that Slavs being offered on Crimean slave markets from the 6th Century onwards are the reason for the (alleged) connotation. That’s all historically correct and fascinating, but none of this really explains the semantic shift from M.L. sclavus>Slav to sclavus>slave.
At the same time False etymology suggests: "A more malicious example was the derivation of Slav from slave, which was used by the Nazis as a pseudo-linguistic justification for some of their atrocities against Slavs" and "slave goes back via *scylavus to Greek skyleúo, skyláo "I plunder" (related to Greek skylon, spoils of war)." This article’s counterpart on the German Wikipedia states that the connection Slav/slave can’t have oringinated in Central Europe since the medieval Germans knew nothing of Slavs: They called their Eastern neighbors Wenden (Latin: Venedae) and except for Russian (slaviane) all the other Slavic languages of Eastern Europe are written with an O (sloveni, slowianie, slovjany), not an A. It's thus rather unlikely that those Germans linked "Sklave" to Slavic people.
Any experts around? Is the slave/Slav theory obsolete? Teodorico 15:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology, again 

message: whats the word for a loyal slave. or willing slave. MegaloManiac 09:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  uhh 

message: Is it me, or are the comments about slaves belonging to the state and being sent to war a way of dragging in the draft as a type of slavery?  Goldfritha 03:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Draft

message: Under this section is says: In traditional Maori society, prisoners of war became slaves, (unless released, ransomed or eaten). Emphasis mine. Is their any evidence for the eating of slaves? I ask since overinflated accusations of cannibalism are very common, especially during the Age of Discovery/Colonialism. See cannibalism. Ashmoo 02:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aotearoa / New Zealand

message: The opening paragraph says "A specific form, known as chattel slavery, is defined by the absolute legal ownership of a person or persons by another person or state, including the legal right to buy and sell them just as one would any common object, or the legal right to force the slave to fight in a war."  Actually, the "chattel" part doesn't 'include' the legal right to buy and sell, it means the right to buy and sell ('chattel' is a synonym for 'property').  Also, what does forcing to fight in a war have to do with chattel slavery in particular?  In general, slaves (chattel or not) can be legally forced to perform whatever work or service their master/owner demands.  If no rebuttal, I will rephrase.  --Macrakis 00:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect that "force to fight a war" is put in to call conscription a form of slavery.  It definitely should go.  Goldfritha 00:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Force to fight

message: I removed the Punishments section entirely, as it was crap.  It wasn't up to the standards of the rest of the article, it didn't mention what part of the world these punishments were from.  Furthermore, it ended with material about a classroom in Colorado trying to raise money to buy the freedom for slaves, which has nothing whatsoever to do with punishments.  I am not necessarily opposed to there being a Punishments section in this article, but this particular section has to go. --Xyzzyplugh 15:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I removed the Punishments section

message: The more popular notion of slavery originates from the collectivist identity that identifies a certain race of people as inferior merely because of their skin colour or ethnicity.
More popular when, where, and in whose thoughts?  Clearly not universally.  Racially based slavery is rather less common than this makes out.  Goldfritha 02:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Collectivist?

message: Do you people think if there was no slavery in America the African-Americans would be a bit nicer i mean that happened like 50 60 years ago my grand parent's where not slaves and there grand parent's did not have slaves  .... or is it just the  place i live in  Charlotte NC ..85% African-Americans in the prisons here explain that to me and i am black so it is fine for me to say this—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.1.181.31 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 9 August 2006.
:Your question makes me wonder if European-Americans would be nicer if they weren't the descendants of slave-owners. See how silly that question is when turned around? It's just as silly when you ask it.  --70.72.19.133 03:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: slavery blacks

message: The following section was removed from the chattel section:
:In the United States, the Emancipation Proclamation was written in 1862 to outlaw slavery in what was to become the Confederate States of America, an area over which Union-allied forces exercised no control. The proclamation did not free slaves in the Union-allied slaves states of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, however. Four years later, following the Civil War, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution which banned all forms of slavery.
Is that particularly relevant to the history of chattel slavery in the world, e.g. the first time it was abolished in the west, or some other significance? It seems out of place. 67.181.63.245 02:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed 

message: When this article was cleaned up and reduced in size, most of the material on the history of slavery was dumped without being distributed into other articles. There's some very good material here, including information I was looking for earlier today and not finding. I resurrected this material from version "22:23, 11 July 2006; 67.188.173.95", the last revision of this material before it was dumped, and put it in its own article, history of slavery. I have also changed several redirects from "slavery" to "history of slavery". Peter G Werner 03:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Slavery 

message: :However, it can also be argued that conscripts are not "slaves", as they have substantial legal rights, and any government which took it upon itself to implement conscription, outside a time of extreme national emergency, would eventually face a backlash at an election.
The above paragraph was in the section discussing conscription as slavery. The first part is unnuanced. The amount of legal rights that conscripts have of course depends on the country, and in a system of slavery there may be legal limits to what the slavemaster can do to the slave, thus giving the slaves some legal rights (though perhaps not substantial). The second part about conscription outside of national emergencies is false (to say nothing of non-democracies). Israel has had conscription since its inception, and not only have governments not faced backlash, but at present a party that proposed to end mandatory conscription would almost certainly be defeated at the polls. If someone wants to add this paragraph in again, please rework it. Rusco 06:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't almost every nation in democratic Europe have some form of conscription (under what's called National Service or a similar phrase)? And you're right about non-democracies; it's easy to forget that a large percentage of the world's population lives in places where democracy is either strictly controlled or doesn't exist at all. --70.72.19.133 03:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  conscription as slavery 

message: Cut lengthy passage:
----
Organized slavery has 2 elements:
; Purpose for slavery : Prior to the development of agriculture 10,000 years ago, there was no advantage from retaining captive slaves. Agriculture lifted humans out of subsistence living, delivering higher rates of productivity.
; Justification for slavery : Farming provided the master with an opportunity to put their prisoners of war (POW) to work for them. It's contentious whether this constitutes slavery since the POWs might in fact have initiated the war. Other slaves were criminals or people who could not pay their debts
The more popular notion of slavery originates from the collectivist identity that identifies a certain race of people as inferior merely because of their skin color or ethnicity.  This collectivist identity (even in the more individualistic cultures) explains why even after slavery is abolished the indentured serfs and their descendants were still exposed to discrimination and suffered from the misconception that they were intellectually 'less human'.  A popular rationalization was that God provided blacks as a source of slave labor.
The origin of slavery was considered by the philosopher Hegel to be an important stage in the development of self-consiouness (see master slave dialectic).  In this sense neither a master nor a slave is fully self-conscious.
----
I can't figure out what this has to do with "How people become slaves". 
*What is a "more popular notion of slavery"? More popular than what? Why call it a "notion"? 
*What does "collectivist identity" have to do with it? Is this a Marxist analysis? If so, which Marxist author's idea is this? (cite needed)
*What is the relevance of contrasting Collectivist and individualist cultures? I went to that article, but it didn't mention slavery. 
*Did the advent of farming coincide with the advent of slavery? Can we get a source for this, or is this simply "common knowledge"? (I think it's part of Marxist theory; I'd have to check.)
*When did agriculture start? We mention Joseph being sold into slavery (using the Old Testament book of Genesis as a source), but Genesis mentions Cain as farming too. 
Perhaps the information cut and pasted here, can be re-tooled into a sociological analysis - although this risks becoming Original Research. The following points seem valid, even if other editors feel they need citations:
*A popular rationalization was that God provided blacks as a source of slave labor.
**This rationalization was held in 18th & 19th century United States. When and where else did slave-owners claim a heavenly mandate? Ancient Greece, maybe? How about the Islamic world? 
*their descendants were still exposed to discrimination and suffered from the misconception that they were intellectually 'less human'.  
**This also pertains to the U.S., which relates to the controversy over Race and intelligence that was not settled by the publication of The Bell Curve. 
Anyone want to help with this? --Uncle Ed 13:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A philosophical essay

message: Both the abolition section of this article and the History of slavery article correctly date British abolition to 1834 (law passed 1833, period of "apprenticeship" of ex-slaves until 1838).  The chart however gives the date of the end of legal British slave trading, which is different.  The comparable date for the U.S. would be 1808, but 1865 is the correct date of slavery abolition. Ngwe 20:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrected date of British abolition in abolition chart 

message: Hello! Comments from other contributors are welcome on Talk:Herero and Namaqua Genocide, where one user has repeatedly pushed her negationist POV. Thanks, Lapaz 15:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Herero and Namaqua Genocide]] 

message: Reverted vandalism by 216.162.90.2. Requesting protection.
81.69.188.48 14:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: I removed the paragraph that mentioned the US protest against equating Zionism with racism, as this article is neither about Zionism, nor racism. Slavery is not racism. All throughout history there have been slaves owned by people of their own race. And what does Zionism have to do with any of this ?! Dullfig 19:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That paragraph seemed to equate it for some reason. But without a reference you were certainly correct to remove it.--Caranorn 21:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Paragraph on Zionism

message: The aristocratic class in England convinced themselves that the African slaves were pagans and practised vulgar rites such as cannibalism and bestiality. They felt that through 'bringing them to civilization', they could Christinize them and save their souls from hell. Yet very rarely was the Gospel truly preached to the slaves. They mostly only observed their owners form of godliness.
:But don't forget that you are talking about a very small chapter in slavery. Europe did not invent slavery. It had been going on for thousands of years. Dullfig 21:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And doesn't England get credit for being the first nation to abolish slavery? Dullfig 21:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion as a justification for slavery

message: I added sub-sections to the "History" portion of this article, for easier readability, and also for readers who are looking for specific information. Feel free to play around with the title names, as I've mainly used the text itself as my guide. If you have questions or concerns, please drop a note on my talk page or here. Thank you. NinaEliza 15:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added Sub-sections

message: I see where this is going. Several sections are being slanted to the "left" of the spectrum, and are trying to lump with slavery, employees of places like sweat-shops. This, in my oppinion, is POV, and has nothing to do with slavery. Can we please stick to the traditional interpretation of slavery, as spelled out in the intro? thanks. -- Dullfig 00:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Slavery vs Unfree labor