Even 150 years after the abolition of slavery, it is still a hot button issue as to its lasting effects on racial relations and social hierarchy to this very day. While no sane, intelligent person would claim that the mass enslavement of Africans, Native Americans, or other nationalities and races was a good thing, simply due to human rights violations and the philosophical invention of racism, philosophers as recent as Robert Nozick are able to ask a different question with a similar moral implication: should someone be able to legally sell themselves into slavery free of coercion? While many philosophers disagree with Nozick’s affirmation of slave contracts, if principles of self-ownership are applied, it is apparent that slave contracts without coercion are justified in a free society. The philosophies that best illustrate this moral idea are Robert Nozick’s theory of libertarianism and Fredrick Douglass’s theory of coerced slavery; and it is best negated by John Stuart Mill’s theory of utilitarianism and John Locke’s theory of classical libertarianism.
Robert Nozick’s theory of libertarianism does specifically affirm non-coerced slave contracts, however Nozick best describes his reasoning in his work Anarchy State and Utopia, claiming that “Our main conclusions about the state are that a minimal state, limited, to the narrow functions of protection against force, theft, fraud, enforcement of contracts, and so on, is justified, but any more extensive state will violate persons' rights not to be forced to do certain things, and is unjustified.” When this quote is dissected it shows support of un-coerced slave contracts. First, because the state described in this quote by Nozick only exists to make sure that people follow in wha...
... middle of paper ...
...e is unlikely as dictated by historical examples, and we should use philosophy that is relevant to our society, rather than a philosophy that would describe a socialist society.
In conclusion, Nozick’s theories of voluntary slavery should be allowed in a free society, so long as both parties are at an agreement. John Stuart Mill’s philosophy may be able to completely overshadow Nozick in the distant future, after humanity has progressed into a socialist state. However, as of today, Nozick has the most relevant philosophy on slave contracts and voluntary slavery. Nozick would never support coercion or enslavement of anyone without their consent, which makes it different that the slavery experienced in America; however, a society that values self-ownership dictates that anyone can do with themselves whatever they so choose, including selling themselves into slavery.
The contradictions between slavery and freedom are very apparent throughout history. America started out with the intentions of becoming separate and equal. To become this kind of nation they needed a crop that would give them something to trade with the other countries. The most obvious choice was tobacco and to produce this demanding crop they used a lot of slave labor. Morgan states 'To a very large degree it may be said that Americans bought their independence with slave labor (122).' America was so obsessed with being free and equal it looks like they would go to any length to obtain it. Another example would be certain slave owners. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington all owned slaves. This is interesting especially with Jefferson who had a major role in republican liberty. Another contradictory point made by Morgan is how England which prides itself in the l...
...es. By adapting socialist ideals into a capitalist economic and social system a prosperous society results.
Robert Nozick was a political philosopher who best reflects the political thinking of the United States, to the extent that his work is unthinkable without considering the history and the constitution of the nation. From this starting point Nozick show us that in the state of nature men are entitled on one hand to their lives and safety, and also to self-possession. Inspired by empiricist philosopher John Locke who proclaimed that natural rights exist and are claimable, Nozick claims that his concept of a minimal state is morally justifiable. “Only a minimal state, limited to enforcing contracts and protecting people against any force, theft, and fraud, is justified. Any more extensive state violates person’s rights not to be force to do certain
Nozick introduces his theory by calling a “minimal state” (Nozick 149) the only justifiable state that does not infringe on the rights of the people living in this state. Nozick as a libertarian, believes in the freedom of the individual over all else., Nozick says, “There is no one natural dimension or weighted sum or combination of a small number of natural dimensions that yields the distributions generated in accordance with the principle of entitlement”(Nozick 157). The patterns, upon which certain sections argue for the distribution of wealth, such as poverty etc., do not impress Nozick at all. Continuing the belief of individual freedom over all else, Nozick then presents his entitlement theory, which advocates that all of one’s possessions sho...
The lack of directive for rights of freedmen resulted in an incomplete upheaval of slavery. Foner argues that ‘freedmen did not receive the American ideal of equal citizenship’.
After the American Revolution, slavery began to decrease in the North, just as it was becoming more popular in the South. By the turn of the century, seven of the most Northern states had abolished slavery. During this time, a surge of democratic reform swept the North to the West, and there were demands for political equality, economic and social advances for all Americans. Northerners said that slavery revoked the human right of being a free person and when new territories became available i...
When the analysis of slavery by Charles Darwin and John Locke are brought forth, both share a common stance excluding one solitary indisposition. For John Locke’s view, though similar in nature, portrays from a hypocritical perspective. Although both exemplify their views on equality, Charles Darwin observes slaveries position in nature, while John Locke observes its position as a mean of punishment.
The American Revolution was a “light at the end of the tunnel” for slaves, or at least some. African Americans played a huge part in the war for both sides. Lord Dunmore, a governor of Virginia, promised freedom to any slave that enlisted into the British army. Colonists’ previously denied enlistment to African American’s because of the response of the South, but hesitantly changed their minds in fear of slaves rebelling against them. The north had become to despise slavery and wanted it gone. On the contrary, the booming cash crops of the south were making huge profits for landowners, making slavery widely popular. After the war, slaves began to petition the government for their freedom using the ideas of the Declaration of Independence,” including the idea of natural rights and the notion that government rested on the consent of the governed.” (Keene 122). The north began to fr...
For most American’s especially African Americans, the abolition of slavery in 1865 was a significant point in history, but for African Americans, although slavery was abolished it gave root for a new form of slavery that showed to be equally as terrorizing for blacks. In the novel Slavery by Another Name, by Douglas Blackmon he examines the reconstruction era, which provided a form of coerced labor in a convict leasing system, where many African Americans were convicted on triumphed up charges for decades.
Slavery was the core of the North and South’s conflict. Slavery has existed in the New World since the seventeenth century prior to it being exclusive to race. During those times there were few social and political concerns about slavery. Initially, slaves were considered indentured servants who will eventually be set free after paying their debt(s) to the owner. In some cases, the owners were African with white servants. However, over time the slavery became exclusive to Africans and was no limited to a specific timeframe, but life. In addition, the treatment of slaves worsens from the Atlantic Slave trade to th...
Ghali, K. (2008). NO SLAVERY EXCEPT AS A PUNISHMENT FOR CRIME: THE PUNISHMENT CLAUSE AND SEXUAL SLAVERY. UCLA Law Review, 55(3), 607-642. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Nozick agrees with the liberty principle proposed by Rawls, but he disagrees with the equality principle and the fashion in which resources are distributed. I believe the historical principle of distribution is one strength of Nozick’s ideas. The historical principle of distribution states that the justice of any distribution does not depend on how closely it resembles any form of an equality pattern but how the distribution came about (959). I also agree with the theory that people are entitled to anything they acquired voluntarily and anything that is transferred to them voluntarily (958). Nozick does not agree with redistribution of wealth because taking resources from one person to benefit others is not necessarily voluntary. The biggest weaknesses of Nozick’s idea of equality comes from the idea that taxation and federally funded programs would be unjust forcing everything to be owned privately. This creates the most issues because people are self-interested and the virtue of market may not create the balance which Nozick proposed. Public school systems and public roads being deemed illegitimate would create issues with access. Also, making taxation illegal would make it difficult to have services like a police force, fire department, court system, or penal system because they would have to be paid by the individual directly. The police and court systems could become corrupt
Nozick’s central claim is that any sort of patterned distribution will have a significant effect on liberty. First, Nozick’s idea of a “patterned distribution” needs to be separated from the notion of “unpatterned distribution”. Obviously, patterned distribution adheres to an unspecific pattern. Nozick’s own theory in itself is unpatterned, a theory that suggests that each person acquisition of goods have been acquired through legitimate means. Nozick’s conception of “legitimate means” is manifested through his Entitlement Theory. The Entitlement Theory ...
In 1807, the slave trade was abolished by the British Parliament. It became illegal to buy and sell slaves, but people could still own them. In 1833 Parliament finally abolished slavery itself, both in Britain and throughout the British Empire. Why, when the slave trade and the plantations in the West Indies seemed to be making so much money, were they abolished? It was due to a mixture of white campaigners, slaves and economics of the slave trade which finally brought slavery to an end.
The word “slavery” brings back horrific memories of human beings. Bought and sold as property, and dehumanized with the risk and implementation of violence, at times nearly inhumane. The majority of people in the United States assumes and assures that slavery was eliminated during the nineteenth century with the Emancipation Proclamation. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth; rather, slavery and the global slave trade continue to thrive till this day. In fact, it is likely that more individuals are becoming victims of human trafficking across borders against their will compared to the vast number of slaves that we know in earlier times. Slavery is no longer about legal ownership asserted, but instead legal ownership avoided, the thought provoking idea that with old slavery, slaves were maintained, compared to modern day slavery in which slaves are nearly disposable, under the same institutionalized systems in which violence and economic control over the disadvantaged is the common way of life. Modern day slavery is insidious to the public but still detrimental if not more than old American slavery.