I'm sorry I have a strong aversion to hyperbole, but if you're going to compare the situations outlined in the article to slavery you're going to have to lump a lot of other stuff into the slavery pile as well. It's important to preserve the weight of words lest you further increase people's apathy.
I am no apologist for any country, but wouldn't a better point be the very real, widespread, and constitutionally-protected prisoner slavery, which is happening in America today not just 300 years ago?
It's horribly insensitive to even mention slavery in the same breath. There are actual slaves in the world and this is a completely different situation.
>This is very much not slavery. It's terrible, it's fraud, and it's arguably indentured servitude, but it's not slavery. Calling it slavery is an insult to people who are owned and chained.
Actually trivializing it because it doesn't meet some ideal of what slavery should be is the actual insult to people who have to live through that hell life.
And the people indeed are or have been "owned and chained" would have no problem with calling such an injustice slavery too. That would be actually petty of them...
Not to mention that historically and globally there have been many forms and traditions of slavery and servitude -- including similar debt schemes, used even back in ancient Greece and Rome.
I agree with what you are saying, just that the way you originally went about saying it by including a contrived hyperbolic example regarding slavery was a poor way to frame your position, at least in my opinion, and made your argument less likely to be received in good faith.
I empathize with your outrage, but you're being hyperbolic. I think you should avoid this because it's a good way of discrediting your position.
reply