• huge_clock@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    You didn’t read the article you linked. In it Walter Block states that slavery violates the non-aggression-principle and is not permissible under libertarianism.

    • cogman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Let us now double down. Previously (Block 2005; 2013) wrote that slavery, in the absence of violence, compulsion, NAP violation was ―not so bad.‖ That was a poor choice of words. It was an inaccurate understatement. The truth of the matter is that under these conditions ―slavery‖ would be a positive good. There, I said it. I will say it again: ―Slavery‖ would be a positive good, under these conditions. Make of that what you will, New York Times and other enemies of freedom and logic. But note that when I assert that ―slavery‖ would be a benefit, two things occurred. First, I placed quote marks (―‖) around the word ―slavery‖ and second I mentioned that under these conditions it would be beneficial. I did not say, and I entirely reject the notion that slavery as actually practiced was anything other than a disgrace, a stark horrid evil. It is my view that the movies ―Django Unchained,‖ ―Twelve Years a Slave,‖ and the television series ―Roots‖ are roughly accurate depictions of this monstrous practice