This is a nit pick. The violence permits the selling and owning of people as property. Whatever you want to call it, that is immoral.
Can you name 3 differences between chattel slavery and indentured servitude? I can name five but I don’t expect you to be as well researched.
CXORA@aussie.zone 1 month ago
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Yes I agree it is immoral and detestable and was also the softest option for the day. No other contemporary culture had any protection for indentured servants, yet the Bible demands it at the threat of community judgment against the harsh and cruel masters. And the children of indentured servants were free citizens.
Compared to today it was still brutal and inumane, but was the MOST humane option for literally 3000 years. It’s just not progressive compared to today’s values.
And today’s values won’t seem very progressive to progressive humans in 3000 years either, something you are probably incapable of understanding.
CXORA@aussie.zone 1 month ago
As long as you don’t pretend the bible didn’t permit slavery were all good.
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Stubborn piece of shit welcome to my blocklist.
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
That only applied to Jewish slaves.
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Incorrect
ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Can you tell me who wrote the Bible?
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Douglas Adams?
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
What is the relevance to what I said?
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Fuck off bot
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
Fuck you too asshole.
barooboodoo@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Go for it, we’re all really interested
Hagenman@lemmy.world 1 month ago
And he chickened out.
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I did not…
lemmy.world/post/31819557/17828907
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 month ago
The children of indentured servants were eligible to be free citizens
Indentured servanthood had a clearly defined period of service
Freed indentured servants could petition to become full members of the household and inherit the master’s estate.
Being an indentured servant to a prestigious master was a social mark of standing, elevating them in some periods even above free citizens of low standing. Never the case in chattel slavery
Indentured servants and their families were owed damages when the violence was deemed unjust or resulted in permanent damage or death.
CXORA@aussie.zone 1 month ago
the status of your child does not tell us whether or not you were a slave
this is just false. Foreign slaves were kept for life.
see 2
somw slaves having a “better life” than some free people is a common whitewashing tactic, which doesn’t make it not slavery.
having restrictions against the cruel state and most injaut masters does not mean it isn’t slavery.