http://redhotrussia.com/belarus-feudalism-lukashenko-new-law/
If true, this is very scary.
that bill was for involuntary labor, not slavery
It is not slavery if the government does it.
So, what can libertarians do to help? Or is it the Byelorussians’ own fault, since they have not rebelled?..
the country already has conscription, the countries politics look very shaky
Just how do you define slavery? Any-time someone makes a choice for you, to that extent they make you a slave. What do you think the word ‘involuntary’ means? Maybe it’s not total-slavery, where the worker has lost every last decision-making ability, but it is still slavery.
Is nobody gonna sig this?
i guess with different definitions it can be different things
a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another is what i think of first when i think of slave.
it does not sound like this law makes people property, but bound to a service contract.
under a definition of subserviance, all sorts of workers could be called slaves as they have to obey orders, leave, or get fired.
maybe i should just take the difference between slave and nonslave as
a nonslave can leave, and perhaps lose some property as agreed in a contract
a slave cannot leave, and is punished by loss of autonomy.
in that sense this could be called slavery as it said work, or be forced to work.
another separation could be labor could be bought and sold and forced, but not the person, as in what happened with indentured servants.
And having property means the ability to make decisions about and control that property. Thus, forcing someone to labor it treating them as property, means to make them a slave in part. It also means deciding where they shall remain physically, so it’s false imprisonment, violating freedom of assocaition. Interfering with pursuit of happiness, etc.
If you can quit and leave or get fired and leave, you’re not a slave. If you can’t, you’re a slave.
Reminds me of this recent story:
Scary stuff.
incarceration is slavery then, and i’m not sure which countries don’t have that.
Slavery is unjust, incarceration is (usually) just, as a punishment for serious crime. That’s the difference. The US constitution uses a similar principle, stating that no one may be incarcerated or subject to forced labor without due process.
people in the usa can be incarcerated for leaving work or refusing to report for work, the military is a example
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/awol6.htm
due process does not make a decision or law just.
Incarceration is slavery.
The military isn’t just ‘work’ it’s sometimes involuntary work. It is coercive, claiming rights against you others couldn’t.
In cases where conscription is used, that is genuinely slavery. Preventing someone from leaving work is also slavery. Even in the military, one should be able to quit at will and should not be able to be held at work. (Remedy for quitting military service while retaining voluntarism is financial damage for breaking a service contract and probably also blacklisting from similar occupations).
Let’s say a man commits a crime. He’s taken into custody or w/e, sued for recompense. He is convicted in a 3rd party court via objective rules of evidence, publicly, etc. That constitutes due process. He is sentenced to labor to repay damages, having no existing capital.
That would be just forced labor. His right to not be forced to do labor is abrogated by his first using force against someone else to do the damage he’s convicted of.
“The military isn’t just ‘work’ it’s sometimes involuntary work. It is coercive, claiming rights against you others couldn’t.”
Not if you voluntaryily sign up for the military. Then it is just part of the contract.
True, but in such a case it becomes functionally equivalent to a free market ‘slvaery’ contract voluntarily entered into: ethical as long as the worker’s consent remains and immediately unethical the minute consent is withdrawn.
My inclination is to think that incarceration is slavery.