• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

The emergence of legal slavery

Go to CruxDreams.com
As far as the re-institution of legal slavery, I think it could plausibly develop in most any country. Let's take the U.S. Let's say a racist, nativist xenophobe is elected President. Obviously that won't happen any time soon, so this is clearly set in the far future. Let's call this President "Ronald Crump." Late in Crump's second term there is a national emergency--a significant terrorist attack on American soil or perhaps a more or less conventional war is begun with a foreign nation. Crump essentially declares martial law for the duration. The Constitution is amended so Crump can have a third term in office, and at the end of that, is unanimously proclaimed President-For-Life. As part of his many sweeping revisions and reforms, the justice system is overhauled and streamlined. Mandatory Minimum sentences are extended and broadened to encompass many more kinds of crime. For instance, Dissemination of Disinformation, the "Fake News" statute, is a federal offense, with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Journalists or reporters of any kind who file stories seen as hostile or unflattering to the Crump administration are convicted under the statute, and given long prison terms. Soon, anyone seen as opposing the administration is jailed.

Jails and prisons are privatized. As profit oriented institutions, prison administrators no longer permit inmates to simply serve out their time in cells or in a prison yard. Rather, their labor is sold to the highest bidder, to replace the immigrant labor that had been doing the difficult, monotonous, dirty, even dangerous work that American citizens had been unwilling to do. Prisons become more profitable by reducing their overhead and expanding their productive capacity. The work force is expanded by more laws and longer sentences. Once again it is common to see chain gangs along the roads and working in the fields.

The Supreme Court, now packed with justices who are as reactionary as the man to whom they owe their fealty, rule in Barbaria v United States that corporal punishment does not necessarily fall under the "Cruel and Unusual" prohibition of the eighth amendment. "The whipping post, the stocks, the pillory, were in common use during the time of the Founding Fathers," writes the Chief Justice in a unanimous opinion. "It is absurd to suggest that the original intent of these men was to prohibit the use of such devices to further the cause of justice in a well ordered and disciplined society. The application to this court by petitioner for stay is denied, petitioner may be whipped."

Perhaps this is not strictly slavery. Let's call it "Disciplinary Institutionalization and Rehabilitation."
 
Jon Smithie said:
As far as the re-institution of legal slavery, I think it could plausibly develop in most any country. Let's take the U.S. Let's say a racist, nativist xenophobe is elected President. Obviously that won't happen any time soon, so this is clearly set in the far future. Let's call this President "Ronald Crump." Late in Crump's second term there is a national emergency--a significant terrorist attack on American soil or perhaps a more or less conventional war is begun with a foreign nation. Crump essentially declares martial law for the duration. The Constitution is amended so Crump can have a third term in office, and at the end of that, is unanimously proclaimed President-For-Life. As part of his many sweeping revisions and reforms, the justice system is overhauled and streamlined. Mandatory Minimum sentences are extended and broadened to encompass many more kinds of crime. For instance, Dissemination of Disinformation, the "Fake News" statute, is a federal offense, with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Journalists or reporters of any kind who file stories seen as hostile or unflattering to the Crump administration are convicted under the statute, and given long prison terms. Soon, anyone seen as opposing the administration is jailed.

Jails and prisons are privatized. As profit oriented institutions, prison administrators no longer permit inmates to simply serve out their time in cells or in a prison yard. Rather, their labor is sold to the highest bidder, to replace the immigrant labor that had been doing the difficult, monotonous, dirty, even dangerous work that American citizens had been unwilling to do. Prisons become more profitable by reducing their overhead and expanding their productive capacity. The work force is expanded by more laws and longer sentences. Once again it is common to see chain gangs along the roads and working in the fields.

The Supreme Court, now packed with justices who are as reactionary as the man to whom they owe their fealty, rule in Barbaria v United States that corporal punishment does not necessarily fall under the "Cruel and Unusual" prohibition of the eighth amendment. "The whipping post, the stocks, the pillory, were in common use during the time of the Founding Fathers," writes the Chief Justice in a unanimous opinion. "It is absurd to suggest that the original intent of these men was to prohibit the use of such devices to further the cause of justice in a well ordered and disciplined society. The application to this court by petitioner for stay is denied, petitioner may be whipped."

Perhaps this is not strictly slavery. Let's call it "Disciplinary Institutionalization and Rehabilitation."
Click to expand...

So you consider a dictatorship a necessary prerequisite - a society where none are truly free, even if some are more slaves than others?
 
Jon Smithie said:
As far as the re-institution of legal slavery, I think it could plausibly develop in most any country. Let's take the U.S. Let's say a racist, nativist xenophobe is elected President. Obviously that won't happen any time soon, so this is clearly set in the far future. Let's call this President "Ronald Crump." Late in Crump's second term there is a national emergency--a significant terrorist attack on American soil or perhaps a more or less conventional war is begun with a foreign nation. Crump essentially declares martial law for the duration. The Constitution is amended so Crump can have a third term in office, and at the end of that, is unanimously proclaimed President-For-Life. As part of his many sweeping revisions and reforms, the justice system is overhauled and streamlined. Mandatory Minimum sentences are extended and broadened to encompass many more kinds of crime. For instance, Dissemination of Disinformation, the "Fake News" statute, is a federal offense, with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Journalists or reporters of any kind who file stories seen as hostile or unflattering to the Crump administration are convicted under the statute, and given long prison terms. Soon, anyone seen as opposing the administration is jailed.

Jails and prisons are privatized. As profit oriented institutions, prison administrators no longer permit inmates to simply serve out their time in cells or in a prison yard. Rather, their labor is sold to the highest bidder, to replace the immigrant labor that had been doing the difficult, monotonous, dirty, even dangerous work that American citizens had been unwilling to do. Prisons become more profitable by reducing their overhead and expanding their productive capacity. The work force is expanded by more laws and longer sentences. Once again it is common to see chain gangs along the roads and working in the fields.

The Supreme Court, now packed with justices who are as reactionary as the man to whom they owe their fealty, rule in Barbaria v United States that corporal punishment does not necessarily fall under the "Cruel and Unusual" prohibition of the eighth amendment. "The whipping post, the stocks, the pillory, were in common use during the time of the Founding Fathers," writes the Chief Justice in a unanimous opinion. "It is absurd to suggest that the original intent of these men was to prohibit the use of such devices to further the cause of justice in a well ordered and disciplined society. The application to this court by petitioner for stay is denied, petitioner may be whipped."

Perhaps this is not strictly slavery. Let's call it "Disciplinary Institutionalization and Rehabilitation."
Click to expand...
Wow this sounds like a CF story! Oh, wait it IS a CF story!

The Re-education Of Barbara Moore

The genesis of this story was a couple of short posts on this thread http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/threads/slaves-treated-very-badly.5588/page-5. I thought it might be interesting to expand the concept into a longer story. Thanks to Old Slave for planting a few seeds and to Barb for, as always...
www.cruxforums.com
 
Jon Smithie said:
The Supreme Court, now packed with justices who are as reactionary as the man to whom they owe their fealty, rule in Barbaria v United States that corporal punishment does not necessarily fall under the "Cruel and Unusual" prohibition of the eighth amendment. "The whipping post, the stocks, the pillory, were in common use during the time of the Founding Fathers," writes the Chief Justice in a unanimous opinion. "It is absurd to suggest that the original intent of these men was to prohibit the use of such devices to further the cause of justice in a well ordered and disciplined society. The application to this court by petitioner for stay is denied, petitioner may be whipped."
Click to expand...

Damn!!! I should have listened when my legal team advised against going to court on this. Can Supreme Court rulings be appealed? And since when does the Supreme Court have petitioners whipped? Where? On the Mall? Naked? In front of the Lincoln Memorial? In full public view? OH SHIT! :eek::facepalm:
 
Jon Smithie said:
As far as the re-institution of legal slavery, I think it could plausibly develop in most any country. Let's take the U.S. Let's say a racist, nativist xenophobe is elected President. Obviously that won't happen any time soon, so this is clearly set in the far future. Let's call this President "Ronald Crump." Late in Crump's second term there is a national emergency--a significant terrorist attack on American soil or perhaps a more or less conventional war is begun with a foreign nation. Crump essentially declares martial law for the duration. The Constitution is amended so Crump can have a third term in office, and at the end of that, is unanimously proclaimed President-For-Life. As part of his many sweeping revisions and reforms, the justice system is overhauled and streamlined. Mandatory Minimum sentences are extended and broadened to encompass many more kinds of crime. For instance, Dissemination of Disinformation, the "Fake News" statute, is a federal offense, with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Journalists or reporters of any kind who file stories seen as hostile or unflattering to the Crump administration are convicted under the statute, and given long prison terms. Soon, anyone seen as opposing the administration is jailed.
Click to expand...

This sounds a lot like something that happened in Germany in the 1930s. Scary!
 
old slave said:
Are any of us truly free in a so-called democracy?
Click to expand...

Now you're getting philosophical...

It's true that slave-holding societies were generally unequal in other ways as well - Rome itself is good example, with a paterfamilias having similar powers over his free children - even into adulthood - as he did his slaves. Even in the antebellum and Confederate South, a democracy, white women could not vote and were largely subordinate to their husbands. It's certainly plausible that such a sense that everybody has a place and should stick to it is an enabler of slavery, perhaps even a prerequisite - and conversely, the modern idea that people should be free to live their lives as they will antithetical to it.

On the other hand, it partly goes to what kind of stories one wants to tell. Certainly, dystopias where society has moved away from freedom and rights in general are always useful warnings. But it can also be important, or just interesting, to isolate the human capacity to make exceptions, and a world where a free person is just as free as they are today* and yet can own slaves is interesting from that perspective.

*Save perhaps the risk of enslavement.

Of course, the path one chooses also depends on what slave demographics one desires - the general mix of the Romans, the racial filter of the South, the gender-based system often seen online, or something else?
 
Migoz2 said:
Just take comfort in the fact that the crowd to watch you will be larger than the last president's inauguration crowd.....
Click to expand...

Giggle Snort. Which will piss him off and earn me a dozen extra lashes followed by my public crucifixion on the White House lawn.
 
Jon Smithie said:
As far as the re-institution of legal slavery, I think it could plausibly develop in most any country. Let's take the U.S. Let's say a racist, nativist xenophobe is elected President. Obviously that won't happen any time soon, so this is clearly set in the far future. Let's call this President "Ronald Crump." Late in Crump's second term there is a national emergency--a significant terrorist attack on American soil or perhaps a more or less conventional war is begun with a foreign nation. Crump essentially declares martial law for the duration. The Constitution is amended so Crump can have a third term in office, and at the end of that, is unanimously proclaimed President-For-Life. As part of his many sweeping revisions and reforms, the justice system is overhauled and streamlined. Mandatory Minimum sentences are extended and broadened to encompass many more kinds of crime. For instance, Dissemination of Disinformation, the "Fake News" statute, is a federal offense, with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Journalists or reporters of any kind who file stories seen as hostile or unflattering to the Crump administration are convicted under the statute, and given long prison terms. Soon, anyone seen as opposing the administration is jailed.

Jails and prisons are privatized. As profit oriented institutions, prison administrators no longer permit inmates to simply serve out their time in cells or in a prison yard. Rather, their labor is sold to the highest bidder, to replace the immigrant labor that had been doing the difficult, monotonous, dirty, even dangerous work that American citizens had been unwilling to do. Prisons become more profitable by reducing their overhead and expanding their productive capacity. The work force is expanded by more laws and longer sentences. Once again it is common to see chain gangs along the roads and working in the fields.

The Supreme Court, now packed with justices who are as reactionary as the man to whom they owe their fealty, rule in Barbaria v United States that corporal punishment does not necessarily fall under the "Cruel and Unusual" prohibition of the eighth amendment. "The whipping post, the stocks, the pillory, were in common use during the time of the Founding Fathers," writes the Chief Justice in a unanimous opinion. "It is absurd to suggest that the original intent of these men was to prohibit the use of such devices to further the cause of justice in a well ordered and disciplined society. The application to this court by petitioner for stay is denied, petitioner may be whipped."

Perhaps this is not strictly slavery. Let's call it "Disciplinary Institutionalization and Rehabilitation."
Click to expand...
Anyone who thinks that such a developement is impossible, should remember the experiment "The third wave".

The Third Wave (experiment) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
windar said:
Wow this sounds like a CF story! Oh, wait it IS a CF story!
Click to expand...
Lol. I read and have just now re-read Barbaria's "The Re-education Of Barbara Moore." I enjoyed it quite a lot, but I can honestly say that I haven't cribbed from it. Actually I was thinking more of how "Trabbian Justice" could come to America. I've also been rather obsessed with my own idea for a story (which, as usual, I will probably never write) along these lines, but one that would not be as satiric or as amusing as Barbara's.
Barbaria1 said:
Damn!!! I should have listened when my legal team advised against going to court on this. Can Supreme Court rulings be appealed? And since when does the Supreme Court have petitioners whipped? Where? On the Mall? Naked? In front of the Lincoln Memorial? In full public view? OH SHIT! :eek::facepalm:
Click to expand...
I believe "petitioner" simply refers to the person or persons who are behind a particular case before the Court. And of course SCOTUS would not be involved in the minutiae of how the sentence was carried out. They would leave that up to the discretion of the institution involved. I can tell you however that President Crump had encouraged public whippings of attractive young offenders as a way to generate yet another revenue stream for penal institutions, in which Crump has a large financial interest. Whippings would be broadcast on cable TV, and spectators would be charged for access just as with any major sporting event. Ultimately such shows become extremely popular. In the typical format, the offenders plead their case, and then spectators vote to decrease or increase the number of lashes, after which the offender is stripped and either caned or flogged, depending, of course, on the practice of that particular state.
Barbaria1 said:
This sounds a lot like something that happened in Germany in the 1930s. Scary!
Click to expand...
Setting aside my fantasy/fetishy interest, I do believe it could happen here.
 
I don't think it's necessary to assume a 'reintroduction of slavery' has to come about by legislative and/or judicial enactments,
through much of history, slavery was simply part of a market economy - when people have no other way to survive,
or believe it's the least worst option, they sell themselves (or their wives or children) And that's certainly happening,
in various ways, in many parts of the world even today.
 
Eulalia said:
I don't think it's necessary to assume a 'reintroduction of slavery' has to come about by legislative and/or judicial enactments,
through much of history, slavery was simply part of a market economy - when people have no other way to survive,
or believe it's the least worst option, they sell themselves (or their wives or children) And that's certainly happening,
in various ways, in many parts of the world even today.
Click to expand...

Yes, but right now that's very much all in the shadows of a world where slavers are hostis humani generis. In order to get from that to a Romanesque world of openly buying and selling people, laws and cultural values must regress - for instance, the concept of universal human rights must be abolished or limited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom