Is employment essentially a form of slavery?
16 comments
Anybody making that comparison should go and study what slavery meant (and unfortunately still means) for a while.
I really find it unbelievable that someone would even contemplate such a comparison and think it a meaningful one.
Your employer does not own you, you can switch employers whenever you want - or you can stop working all together.
Nobody is going to come after you to murder you or haul you back if you run away.
No employer is going to sell you to any other, or take physical advantage of you.
You are not born into employment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
Is word play, it relates to being 'forced', but in reality nobody is really forced. It's just that if you want to take part in society you are expected to pull your weight, and that means either getting a job or doing your own thing (being self employed).
I really find it unbelievable that someone would even contemplate such a comparison and think it a meaningful one.
Your employer does not own you, you can switch employers whenever you want - or you can stop working all together.
Nobody is going to come after you to murder you or haul you back if you run away.
No employer is going to sell you to any other, or take physical advantage of you.
You are not born into employment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
Is word play, it relates to being 'forced', but in reality nobody is really forced. It's just that if you want to take part in society you are expected to pull your weight, and that means either getting a job or doing your own thing (being self employed).
I'm with you most of the way, I think that most of us on HN have more freedom than what alot of people would consider slaves, but I think you're ignoring the coercive factors of economy and society.
I think that people can be placed in compromising positions by economies and cultures that they're a part of. A concrete and probably relevant example could be student loans: a student incurs a tremendous debt for their education, only to be obligated to work in order to service that debt.
Also, your last sentence irks me. Contributing to your community does not mean to have a job. There are plenty of ways to 'pull your weight' that don't involve making money. Building community spaces, plain talking to people, working on a neighborhood watch are all beneficial but are often unpaid. Paying taxes does not necessarily make for a successful community.
I think that people can be placed in compromising positions by economies and cultures that they're a part of. A concrete and probably relevant example could be student loans: a student incurs a tremendous debt for their education, only to be obligated to work in order to service that debt.
Also, your last sentence irks me. Contributing to your community does not mean to have a job. There are plenty of ways to 'pull your weight' that don't involve making money. Building community spaces, plain talking to people, working on a neighborhood watch are all beneficial but are often unpaid. Paying taxes does not necessarily make for a successful community.
It is not your boss that requires you to fill your belly with food. It is reality. It is not your culture that requires you to drink water. It is reality.
That we choose to associate such that we are not all individually responsible for every requirement that reality imposes on us is not slavery. It is simply the universe.
Further, it is not your boss that requires you to buy a new car. It is your choice. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and ordering you to go out to eat instead of eating lentil soup. It is your choice.
You want to avoid "wage slavery?" It is simple. SPEND LESS, and you will not need to make as much. The actual bottom of what you are required to spend is quite low and can be very feasibly picked up in odd jobs, transient employment, and judicious use of public services; you don't even need to go "Mountain Man". But it is not slavery. You have chosen this. If you feel you have no choice but to choose civilization and employment, that is because (free) civilization is a fucking good deal! I only wish there were more like it! Stop whining and enjoy it. Or man up, pay the piper, and disconnect. But don't come whining to me about the consequences.
Slavery is when you are told to do nasty work, and you will be shot if you don't. Or raped, regardless of your gender. It's not even remotely the same.
That we choose to associate such that we are not all individually responsible for every requirement that reality imposes on us is not slavery. It is simply the universe.
Further, it is not your boss that requires you to buy a new car. It is your choice. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and ordering you to go out to eat instead of eating lentil soup. It is your choice.
You want to avoid "wage slavery?" It is simple. SPEND LESS, and you will not need to make as much. The actual bottom of what you are required to spend is quite low and can be very feasibly picked up in odd jobs, transient employment, and judicious use of public services; you don't even need to go "Mountain Man". But it is not slavery. You have chosen this. If you feel you have no choice but to choose civilization and employment, that is because (free) civilization is a fucking good deal! I only wish there were more like it! Stop whining and enjoy it. Or man up, pay the piper, and disconnect. But don't come whining to me about the consequences.
Slavery is when you are told to do nasty work, and you will be shot if you don't. Or raped, regardless of your gender. It's not even remotely the same.
[deleted]
As long as there are wild places in the world where you can hunt and gather, you are NOT forced to be employed. It's all optional. You don't need a cell phone, or a car or a house. You choose this lifestyle because you want the conveniences of "modern life". You can very easily strip off your clothes, go into the mountains of Alaska or wherever and live there, free of charge. May I suggest the first thing you do is kill a bear and make yourself a warm coat. You're going to need it.
You might argue that employment is optional, but this is not the case in practice especially if you have a family to support.
Does that mean you'd consider being a parent to be "slavery"? Were cavemen "slaves" because they had to hunt to feed their family?
Quit flamebaiting. This isn't "intellectually curious."
Does that mean you'd consider being a parent to be "slavery"? Were cavemen "slaves" because they had to hunt to feed their family?
Quit flamebaiting. This isn't "intellectually curious."
It clearly depends on the context.
In the case of an Asian factory worker with no options better than living in factory dorms and working extremely long shifts at often dangerous tasks for little pay to make toys that stock Wal-Mart, the slavery label may have some truth in it. Toni Morrison has spoken a lot in these terms recently, and had a big impact in my thinking as she laid out her evidence.
In the case of an American white or blue collar worker with a limited public social safety net it has more similarity to a feudal system. Matt Taibbi alludes to this in an interesting blog post today: http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/10/06/michael-moores-pr...
In the case of an Asian factory worker with no options better than living in factory dorms and working extremely long shifts at often dangerous tasks for little pay to make toys that stock Wal-Mart, the slavery label may have some truth in it. Toni Morrison has spoken a lot in these terms recently, and had a big impact in my thinking as she laid out her evidence.
In the case of an American white or blue collar worker with a limited public social safety net it has more similarity to a feudal system. Matt Taibbi alludes to this in an interesting blog post today: http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/10/06/michael-moores-pr...
You might argue that employment is optional, but this is not the case in practice especially if you have a family to support.
OK so let's engage in a thought experiment - we make employment optional, so you don't have to work even if you have a family to support. But now, in order to get the resources to support your family, you have to force someone else to do something they don't want to do.
So protecting you from the "slavery" of employment necessarily implies some degree of slavery for some third party, because the resources needed to support your family don't come from nowhere. That's really not fair to the third party, don't you think?
OK so let's engage in a thought experiment - we make employment optional, so you don't have to work even if you have a family to support. But now, in order to get the resources to support your family, you have to force someone else to do something they don't want to do.
So protecting you from the "slavery" of employment necessarily implies some degree of slavery for some third party, because the resources needed to support your family don't come from nowhere. That's really not fair to the third party, don't you think?
slavery is forced, employment is optional
Also, employment is set against certain standards. It typically does not involve whipping or rape. Just a minor detail really.
Employment is not optional in practice for most people.
Depends on where you live. It's quite possible to live (albeit, not well) off the welfare state in most of Europe.
And even were it not, a particular place of employment can still be left.
And even were it not, a particular place of employment can still be left.
You mean, having money is not optional. Employment is optional in the sense that you generally have several choices of where you can work, at least.
Debt is effective slavery. Ask anyone that has a second mortgage and two car payments. Is their job to blame? No way! Their spending put them into literal slavery to a financial institution.
It's a continuum. Employment is for smaller time increments, and the enforcement is handled by a third party.
That said, you might want to reconsider things in both directions. If someone has a very short time horizon, but is capable of doing useful labor, a slave owner will probably treat them better than they'd treat themselves. This is a very reactionary view, which happens to be exemplified by the progressive political movement -- conservatives are okay with letting somebody, e.g., survive on payday loans and live in a flophouse; liberals would rather own more of their economic output and constrain their freedom for their own good.
That said, you might want to reconsider things in both directions. If someone has a very short time horizon, but is capable of doing useful labor, a slave owner will probably treat them better than they'd treat themselves. This is a very reactionary view, which happens to be exemplified by the progressive political movement -- conservatives are okay with letting somebody, e.g., survive on payday loans and live in a flophouse; liberals would rather own more of their economic output and constrain their freedom for their own good.
The opposite of slavery is not laziness or slacking.
Justify the notion.
Many employees are reluctant to look for another job, especially if they have a family to support and/or the economy is not doing well.
And even if they do find another job, it may turn out to be even worse than the one they left.
And even if they do find another job, it may turn out to be even worse than the one they left.
"If someone has X and has the potential to instead choose Y, they might be unhappy because X was better than Y all along"
Let's ban choice!
Let's ban choice!
And they have the option of finding out if job #2 was worse than job #1. In slavery you don't have that option either.
Many men/women are reluctant to look for another partner, since they might own a home or have kids together.
And even if they do find another partner, they might turn out to be worse than the one they left.
Therefore, being in a relationship is, by your yardstick, "slavery."
And even if they do find another partner, they might turn out to be worse than the one they left.
Therefore, being in a relationship is, by your yardstick, "slavery."
I dont think any married man would argue with that perspective!
(joking)
(joking)
As a married man, I do appreciate the joke ;-) That said, for anyone who seriously thinks this, just remember that unless you're being locked in a cellar, you can walk out that door any time you want without being forced to go back. Servants can't.
They dont have to work though. There are state benefits.
Now, if benefits didn't stop after a while, and were available instantly, then you might see employment working very differently.
Why not ban irresponsible personal decisions, instead? Maybe we could punish them with poverty, so they'd happen less often.
One man's hell is another man's heaven.
Maybe slavery is too strong a word but sometimes employment feels like a form of indenture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant
A good reason to start own business.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant
A good reason to start own business.
> A good reason to start own business.
And become indentured to your customers.
And become indentured to your customers.
Saying employment is essentially a form of slavery is making light of slavery. Just because some of us are lucky and privileged enough to work on what we choose, that is not how the rest of the world operates. The majority of the world feels lucky and privileged to work for someone else and have the opportunity to provide for their family.
No, employment is not 'sort of' a form of slavery, it's not even close. Slavery is a very dark practice that removes choice and imprisons people, employment breeds opportunity. So I'd argue, they're opposites.
When you are trying to feed your family or one of the many unemployed in even the richest countries, I'm sure hearing someone compare employment to slavery would be extremely insulting.
No, employment is not 'sort of' a form of slavery, it's not even close. Slavery is a very dark practice that removes choice and imprisons people, employment breeds opportunity. So I'd argue, they're opposites.
When you are trying to feed your family or one of the many unemployed in even the richest countries, I'm sure hearing someone compare employment to slavery would be extremely insulting.
> Saying employment is essentially a form of slavery is making light of slavery.
Well said. I would also add that slavery in the history of the U.S. was especially dark. Slaves were not only robbed of their freedom, but also treated as less than human in many cases enduring the whip, beatings, rape and general mistreatment.
Well said. I would also add that slavery in the history of the U.S. was especially dark. Slaves were not only robbed of their freedom, but also treated as less than human in many cases enduring the whip, beatings, rape and general mistreatment.
You're saying it's a stark difference of degree. But in many cases, it is just a difference of degree.
Many of the employment conditions of the 19th century that eventually led to various laws and labor unions were nowhere near as bad as the dark parts of slaver you allude to, but they were no picnic either.
The US practice of tying health care to employment still smacks of something unsavory to me.
Many of the employment conditions of the 19th century that eventually led to various laws and labor unions were nowhere near as bad as the dark parts of slaver you allude to, but they were no picnic either.
The US practice of tying health care to employment still smacks of something unsavory to me.
That unsavory practice is specifically counter to employment being slavery, BTW. Why do employers offer health coverage? In many cases, it's because they use their benefits packages to compete for employees. (In other cases, it's by a legal mandate of course.)
If employees were slaves, there would be no reason for employers to compete for them.
If employees were slaves, there would be no reason for employers to compete for them.
I agree. The angst you are feeling is not due to your employer, your employment, or your employment contract. You are just too weak to go out on your own.
You might argue that employment is optional, but this is not the case in practice especially if you have a family to support.
You might argue that you can just find a better job. But almost all jobs feel like 9-5 slavery. And the search for a better job may end up in unemployment or a job that's even worse.