Quote:
Originally Posted by diuretic
No, it still doesn't make sense. You can't equate the notion of slavery with an economic system, especially when that economic system eschews the notion of unpaid labour. You may as well try and compare slavery with a tree.
|
The man works and receives nothing that directly corresponds to his labor.
I mean, you might say, "Well he gets a home, food, health care, etcetera 'for free,' so therefore, he's not a slave!" But that doesn't really work when we can make the same argument even for slaves in America's peculiar institution.
The fact remains that the man works for the direct benefit of others. He is deprived of freedom regarding value assessment. He is deprived of the freedoms: to produce as a means of surival, and to consume that which he determines to be of preferential value. That is, he may consume only what his "masters" arbitrate as beneficial value for
his labor. Yes, that's slavery.