Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (10737)	4/9/2001 2:17:34 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

But I couldn't possibly kill a lot of people to free you E. Although I promise to write lots of long plaintive letters on your behalf.

To: E who wrote (10737)	4/9/2001 8:18:20 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Everybody: I'm hereby making it known that if i'm ever abducted, taken forcibly into slavery, I want to be freed. Thank you. Me, too. E, the problem in Sudan was way below my radar. Thank you for posting your research. Shifting back into the abstract, the Sudan scenario illustrates the difficulty in dispassionately discussing slavery as a societal construct. Of the atrocities in Sudan--murder, genocide, torture, kidnapping, etc.--the slavery element is relatively benign. Yes, slavery is often/usually accompanied by terrible atrocities, but it is at least theoretically possible for slavery to be no more than the absence of the freedom to leave. It is also possible for slaves to be valued and protected and be better off than the alternative, which could be homelessness, deprivation, physical danger, etc. I understand that it's hard to think of slavery as simply the ownership by one person of another, but surely everyone understands that I'm not condoning the Holocaust or the scenario in Sudan. Karen