You've landed in Louisiana, 300 years ago and walked into town to see the slave markets.
The slaver has started the auction, and some of the wealthier landowners have started bidding on the hapless, bewildered individuals.
You have a fat sack of silver coins, and you're going to rescue some of these unfortunates, and bring them back to the future.
They'll be huge celebrities and live out their lives in safety and luxury. They're going to love it, and you're going to be a hero.
First, you have to buy them, though.
You have to buy human beings, as if that's actually possible. Not just that, but you have to buy them from a slaver, who kidnapped them for this very purpose, and for whom each sale is also an order to sail back to Africa for more.
Each silver coin will help him buy stores, munitions and leg irons.
Each profitable sale attracting more captains, vessels and crew into this ghastly 'trade'.
You can make a massive difference to any people you buy, people you'll come to know by name and face; but you also know that long after you're gone, the vicious, brutal trade in human livestock will continue, except now it will continue with your sanction and your financial support.
It will enslave people you will never have a chance to meet, people's who's fate and identity you can only deduce.
The slaver doesn't care if you bought them to work a plantation, to eat them alive, or to transport them 300 years into the future.
To him, you are exactly the same as any other slave owner. You're a paying customer, and that's where his interest ends.
One option is to buy as many slaves as you can, and give them the best life possible.
If you subscribe to the mentality that, 'Somebody should do something', then you're probably not going to hesitate. This is particularly appealing if you're drawn to measures and metrics.
You can definitively measure the positive outcome of your action. The exact number of people rescued. Exactly where they lived, how old they are, how healthy they are, languages spoken, relationship to each other etc.
If, on the other hand, you believe that you are responsible for all of the consequences of your actions, both the seen and the unseen, the measurable and the immeasurable, then you'll walk away without bidding.
Before you do so, understand that several things will happen.
Those who would choose to buy the slaves will consider you greedy, and accuse you accordingly. They'll say that you're just as bad as the slavers, prizing your own wealth above the freedom and well being of your fellow man.
If you denounce slavery they will accuse you of hypocrisy and point out that you turned down an easy opportunity to end the enslavement of a dozen people, by just opening that sack of silver. They'll say that if you really hated slavery, you'd reach into your pocket, engage in the trade, and try to improve it from the inside.
While they're looking at the fate of the people, you're thinking of the fate of the coins.
You recognise that the money doesn't cease to exist just because its no longer yours.
Your purchase would commission the capture and imprisonment of many more Africans than you've rescued; attrition being so high across the Atlantic that there are two people kidnapped for each one who survives to stand on the auction block.
You'll be unable to offer any measures or metrics. You'll never know the exact number, age or demographic of the people who won't be kidnapped.
You can deduce that they are numerous, but you can't know, so the people who care about measures and metrics can only quantify the people you declined to rescue, and they'll despise you for it. They'll say, "What have you done to fix it?", as passionately as they declare, "Somebody should do something". Predictably substituting activity for productivity, while mistaking abstinence for apathy.
Please don't support the state with your vote.
Walk away from the booth. Government isn't broken.
It's intrinsically bad and belongs on the scrap-heap of history, right next to chattel slavery.
Have a fantastic day
Very thought-provoking, however if we collectively hold back, then that might lead to a Clinton presidency... and who wants that?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Rhetorical question, but an important one to examine.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Ask a policeman why he imposes the opinions of politicians on the public. He'll tell you that his authority comes from the state, and the state's authority is derived from the consent of the governed, given at the voting booth.
Just like the slaver doesn't care what you do with the slaves, most of the government doesn't care who you vote for, just that you vote.
You're like wrestling fans who buy a ticket to the venue to support your guy, and discourage the other guy. You think that your yells and signs are important, but the wrestlers are just pretending to be competitors. Once you've bought your ticket, they don't care who you support.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If you are at the market is it better to walk away or buy?
If you walk away are you part of the problem or part of the solution?
People do not really consider the costs…
I once visited a friend from Virginia. Someone had done research on the family plantation. Slaves were not cheap. As an economist I did a back of the envelope calculation and a 2005 price of a middle age male negro was $50,000. (converted from a 1860’s Virginia market) You also had to supple free food, housing. One at first might think, great I will buy 20 of these and run a farm and have free labor. Considering minimum wage, education level, housing costs, medical costs, and more it would not be easy to be a benevolent slave master. Buying 20 slaves to run a farm would cost you a million dollars and probable give you a million dollars of headaches.
I am not saying that it couldn’t be done. I am saying people don’t realize how costly it is. Each slave was a significant investment. It had to pay itself off. Considering that someone at minimum wage makes $25,000 a year, but you as a slave owner also had to pay housing, food ect. If someone had any sort of “skills,” they cost more. These people were not literate, so don’t expect much productivity…
Slave markets exist today. Unfortunately, ISIS recently has been selling people (women) in Syria. Children are sold in NEPAL, India and Cambodia. These areas are filled with complexities.
Unfortunately very few people make pro-slavery arguments today. Imagine that you were a boat captain of the 1700 showing up on the shores of Africa. After some local tribes were at war, and had just captured several hundred “enemies,” as victorious cannibals they were having a good feast of their enemies. They invite you to participate. You decline. Then they offer to sell you the rest of the slaves to you for beads or metal knives. Oh if you no buy slave from me, it ok I kill or eat them. I eat slave. Enemy taste good like chicken. Would you buy?
Every action has a cost, and an opportunity cost. Should America invade Syria. This is a mess, we are already partially involved, but it is not really our mess. Who are the good guys? It is not our business. We went into Iraq. We got into a mess. We didn’t go into Syria. People are suffering. We didn’t do into Rwanda, a genocide happened. We went into Somalia. Black hawk down…
You ask a great question, should you get involved or not.
Both sides of action and inaction have a lot of costs and are not simple. I spent 6 months in a genocide zone (Cambodia). I read several books explaining what happened, during the 1970’s. Vietnam, Khmer Rouge, 3 million deaths. Even with 20/20 hindsight what to do is not “easy.” Yes, consider your actions and inactions carefully…
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Great observations.
Are we responsible for the results of our inaction?
I'd suggest not, unless we've previously agreed to act.
Can inaction even have 'results'?
If we have an obligation to act, how widely and at what cost?
Do we then have an obligation to stay alive, since passing away would impose our perpetual inaction on others?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
At times I think we are responsible for the result of our inaction.
Most of the time, i think you are right. Certainly, are inaction can have results. Wisdom would certainly dictate when to intervene, but that can be difficult. If you see someone hurt in an accident on the road, you should stop and help. Obviously, there are a lot of factors, such as your medical knowledge, abilities, and more than one way to help, call police, remove from vehicles and more. Normally, people do a really good job at this, form a quick team and do what needs to be done. There are times not to act, lack of knowledge, risk of further harm.
From an international political level, the US policy post WWII has been to address problems when they are small so they don't get big. If you look at the scale of Wars II; Korea, Vietnam, Gulf I and Gulf II, Afghanistan, were containment exercises. We lost more people on some battles in the pacific, than we lost in all of the Gulf War. From the cost benefit analysis, it makes sense to contain fires when they are small.
Where exactly we draw the line. That is a difficult one.
A good example of consequences can be Vietnam. Ultimately, I would argue it was a proxy war between Russia and the USA over Capitalism/communism. Lots of soldiers got killed. A few years after we left, the North overtook the south and at the same time Laos and Cambodia fell.
Communism's evil caused 3 million deaths in Cambodia. Ultimately, that ideology needs to take responsibility. Had the US stayed in Vietnam (like we did in South Korea, Japan, Germany), we likely would have kept the North from taking over the south, and avoided the 3 million dead in Cambodia. Had the US never gone into Vietnam, Socialism likely would have spread faster, taking Thailand, Malaysia and several other countries with it. This could have resulted in millions more dead. Note: China lost 25+ million to a famine (which was the result of communisms failure) at this same time.
Similar speculations could be made about Iraq/Syria. I don't necessarily like being the World's Policeman, but at times someone has to do it. Sadly, I have to admit it is interesting seeing Europe deal with the Syria mess, after all those years of hearing Europeans tell Americans to get out of Iraq. I sort of enjoyed seeing Obama tell the Europeans to go... solve it themselves. (in Ukraine and Syria) now they are dealing with the results of their inaction.
There are things that need to be done and they all aren’t pleasant. Ultimately, we have to use our best judgement and live with the consequences.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Good job.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Certainly a good analogy, but I see it in a slightly different manner. Take the oft-used example that voting is merely a slave master allowing his slaves to choose the method (from a list) by which they will be punished, or perhaps even when they will work as long at quotas are met. While I don't dispute the validity of this, let's examine it using a practical example in which the slaves are trying to covertly and in what free time they have abolish the system of slavery. Would it be better for the slaves to abstain from making a choice so the master may set work hours and punishments? Or would it be better for slaves to take what little power the master has given to them so they may focus on gaining their freedom? Let's examine another situation in which slaves get to choose between one of two masters. Would it not be better for them to pick the one who promises a better life for the slaves he owns and has a record which indicates he will honor such a promise? Or would it be better for the slaves to choose the one who makes multitudes of promises but whose personal affairs don't match in any way such promises, and whose plantation has an abysmal record with regards to treatment of slaves? Under both slave masters and on both plantations there exist a life which no human should be subjected to, but they are not equal in the horrors inflicted on the slaves within. I'm sure you understand the parallels Matt, but for future readers who may be new to these ideas let me draw the parallels. The two candidates are the slave owners while the two plantations are systems of government. To properly understand the distinctions we must first look back into the past at the systems of both national and international socialism,; both are wretched, but the latter resulted in more human suffering and death than the former ever could have.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Voting isn't choosing, though.
Voting is consenting, then pleading.
In that order. It's the helpless bleat of a lamb to slaughter.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit