This is the second of a two-part post. In the first part (find it here), I developed a better definition of what we actually mean by slavery. In this post, we are going to hold that definition up against some of the things we do in our society today to see whether or not we actually support slavery. But first, let’s review the definition we developed:
Slavery is the sustained practice of forcing another person to work — against their will — for the material gain of another.
Now, let’s see what this definition tells us about the practices we support without realizing they constitute slavery.
The first practice I want to examine is the very notion of socialism. In short, the operational definition of Socialism is the practice of spreading the cost of sustaining life across the whole of society. In other words, ‘sharing the wealth.’ But Socialism is not a natural order; it must be forced on society. If humans are left to themselves, socialism is not the system that naturally develops. It always comes about through the collective action of a majority of people forcing a minority of people to accept the practice. These two groups are almost always ‘the workers’ forcing ‘the rich’ to pay for things they want. Now, I understand that Socialism is usually excused in terms of ‘fairness,’ but — in a socialist system — ‘fairness’ is always defined in terms that inherently justify Socialism. Even if the leaders of a Socialist system create the definition of ‘fairness,’ they will always create a definition that justifies Socialism. The most common definition of ‘fairness’ in a Socialist system is based on a claim that ‘the rich’ have stolen their wealth and need to pay ‘their fair share.’ The whole point is to beg the question that Socialism is actually a moral action, but is it — is it really? Well, let’s apply our definition of slavery to Socialism to see what happens.
Is Socialism a sustained practice? Yes.
Does Socialism use force against anyone in society? Yes, in the form of taxation and imprisonment.
Does Socialism force a person or group to work for the benefit of another person or group? Yes, and this is a two-fold answer. In the first part, it forces the people who must pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes to work for the benefit of those who receive benefits from the government. In the second, it forces those who have intentionally been made dependent on those benefits to work to sustain the system (which materially benefits those who lead it).
As we see, Socialism meets all three primary characteristics of slavery, therefore, Socialism is a system of slavery. This then means those who control the system are the ultimate ‘slave owners’ and all those in the masses are — in one form or another — ‘the slaves.’ But what does this mean for you? Well, let’s look to see whether or not you support any of the Socialized programs our society now practices:
Do you support Social Security? If so, you support a form of slavery (the young being forced to work for the old and disabled).
Do you support Socialized Medicine? If so, you support a form of slavery (the tax payers being forced to pay for the care of those who cannot afford their own care, and the medical workers who are forced to work in the manner the government dictates).
Do you support mandatory public education? If so, you support a form of slavery (the tax payers being forced to pay for a material gain they do not support and/or does not benefit them — as in those without children).
Do you support the corporate system? if so, you support a form of slavery (the masses are forced to accept and treat an artificial entity as a person for the expressed purpose of making it possible for the stock holders to amass greater wealth than they otherwise could under a Natural Law system of economics).
Do you support the idea of a military draft? If so, you believe in a form of slavery (our founders opposed the draft for this very reason).
Do you support affirmative action? If so, you support a form of slavery (people are forced to make economic decisions based on skin color rather than economic considerations for the material gain of the minority in question. And whether we realize it or not, when we work for someone else, they still work for us as their employee. Hiring and managing employees is part of running a business, and that is work on the part of the business owner).
Do you support mandatory insurance for all drivers? If so, you support a form of slavery (drivers are forced to work to pay for something that is justified in terms of protecting the life and property of ‘innocent’ persons, which is a material gain for those ‘innocent’ persons. It should be understood that accepting the risks is an inherent part of driving, thus, the prudent driver should ensure themselves, but never be forced to do so for the sake of another).
Do you support the general notion of ‘licensing?’ If so, you support a form of slavery (by forcing someone to get what is essentially ‘permission’ to do something they have a Natural Right to do — such as work for a living — you are forcing them to spend time/money for the gain of those who benefit from sustaining the system that requires this permission. In essence, licensing is the business of government. It does not ever do what the government claims it does, and we see this every time something happens that is governed by a licensing agency, such as the TSA hiring people associated with terrorism, or an ice cream company developing a bacteria infection in its monitored plant or even a doctor who commits malpractice. All are covered by ‘licensing’ of some form, yet nothing was prevented. The only real benefit is to those who gain employment from this system).
Do you support anti-discrimination laws? Then you support a form of slavery (by forcing people to hire or do business with people with whom they would rather not associate, you are literally forcing people to work for the material gain of another. Do you really think the black slaves in the Colonial South ‘liked’ their white masters? Would you have still forced them to work for those same whites after they had been freed if they said they would rather not do business with them? Well, like it or not, the same principle applies today).
So, have you found a form of slavery you support yet? If you are honest, I would suspect you have found more than one. I would also suspect you may disagree with my calling it a form of slavery. However, everything I just listed meets the definition we derived, so, if you want to reject my claim that everything I just listed is a form of slavery, you will have to go back and ‘defeat’ my definition. If you cannot do that, then you are left facing the same thing I was: you are left facing the reality that you actually do support slavery — but only when it benefits you (i.e. you are the master).