Without good government, chaos would rule. An every man for himself mindset will quickly develop and anarchy take over. Like it or not, the majority of us are slaves, not to those in power, rather to those who are not. We would sink under the weight of a populace that has no idea how to provide for themselves, and would resort to looting and murder to get what they need to survive.

I'll "never forget" the days post 9-11, when most people I knew sat glued to their televisions, or were busy being patriotic, and I was in Providence, and responding to peoples homes where The Jerry Springer Show was the only important thing in their lives, and they insisted to be taken to the hospital for free health care for their minor ailments, and one guy actually pulled a gun on me when I told him to quit being a pussy, there's more pressing matters, and he actually said, "America is on it's knees, finally."

Without their crumbs, which in this day and age of bounty made possible by a government that provides boundaries,and rules of law, equates to cell phones and TV's these people will think themselves cheated, and resort to whatever means available to get what they feel is theirs.

And there a lot more of them than us.

Justin writes:
"an inaccessible article in National Review"

Justin,

If you go to the Drudge Report and click on Jonah Goldberg, it will take you to a page on the web version of NR that provides clickable links to most of the articles in NR.

I don't agree with the premise, but thought I'd ignore that and comment on this one...

Second, statists often begin with the well-being of the lower classes primary in their minds. In that respect, their views are opposite those of slaveholders.

That's not accurate. Slave owners in fact argued that it was in the best interest of the slaves to be maintained as property, since owners took better care of the their property than many employers at the time who viewed workers as largely disposable.

The Yes Men had a hilarious piece on this concept awhile back...
theyesmen.org/hijinks/wharton

The initiative will require Western companies doing business in some parts of Africa to own their workers outright. Schmidt recounted how private stewardship has been successfully applied to transport, power, water, traditional knowledge, and even the human genome. The WTO's "full private stewardry" program will extend these successes to (re)privatize humans themselves.

"Full, untrammelled stewardry is the best available solution to African poverty, and the inevitable result of free-market theory," Schmidt told more than 150 attendees. Schmidt acknowledged that the stewardry program was similar in many ways to slavery, but explained that just as "compassionate conservatism" has polished the rough edges on labor relations in industrialized countries, full stewardry, or "compassionate slavery," could be a similar boon to developing ones..

A system in which corporations own workers is the only free-market solution to African poverty, Schmidt said. "Today, in African factories, the only concern a company has for the worker is for his or her productive hours, and within his or her productive years," he said. "As soon as AIDS or pregnancy hits—out the door. Get sick, get fired. If you extend the employer's obligation to a 24/7, lifelong concern, you have an entirely different situation: get sick, get care. With each life valuable from start to finish, the AIDS scourge will be quickly contained via accords with drug manufacturers as a profitable investment in human stewardees. And educating a child for later might make more sense than working it to the bone right now."

Russ writes:

" since owners took better care of the their property than many employers at the time who viewed workers as largely disposable"

Russ has a point. I have viewed slave quarters in New Orleans and various other Southern areas. They were better than the housing obtained by poor Irish there.

Poor Irish were often hired for dangerous jobs, such as clearing and draining swamps. In those days before liabilty laws and Workers Comp, if a hired man died on the job, the boss saved 1/2 a days pay. Hence the phrase "jobs they wouldn't waste a nigger on".

Interestingly, a year or so ago, I attended a show at the RISD art museum. Pictured was what was captioned as "slave quarters in Georgia". It was a small, round brick building, about 8 feet across. Notwithstanding the caption, closer inspection of the photograph revealed that it was the Revolutionary War "powder house" in North Attleboro, MA.

When considering slavery in our South, it is well to remember that slaves reperesented the wealth in an agricultural economy. They were "human capital". Loss of those slaves meant bankruptcy. It is also well to remember that only 10-15% of Southerners owned slaves in any real number, most people rented as needed.

I have no proof, but strongly suspect, that much of the "philosophy" surrounding slavery and black inferiority developed out of what I would call economic necessity. The economic system, as it developed, was unsustainable without subscription to that philosphy. Most of that philosophy was based on "facts" that uncommitted people would ignore, such as the difference in the size of the bones in the feet of blacks and whites.

"Second, statists often begin with the well-being of the lower classes primary in their minds. In that respect, their views are opposite those of slaveholders. What unites them is the notion that the great majority of human beings are better off letting experts with centralized authority govern their lives. No matter the impetus, that sounds like slavery to me, no matter how beneficent."

Are you saying here that the slaveholders were the "experts with centralized authority who govern" the lives of their slaves?

Warrington - economist Stanley Engerman did a very good talk on slavery back in 2006 on my favorite program, EconTalk. He confirms your economic hypotheses about the institution.

Available free at:
www.econtalk.org/archives/2006/11/engerman_on_sla.html

Dan

I listened to the podcast off your link.
I wonder if you have read Isabel Wilkerson's book "The Warmth of Other Suns".

I have not, Phil, and I notice that it recently came out in 2010. I confess that I'm the guy reads books and watches movies 5 years after they're cool. It's so difficult for me to determine which new media will still be relevant in 5 years that I simply wait for other people to filter these products through to me instead. So I'll make a mental note and put The Warmth of Other Suns down for 2015, if people are still talking about it then.

Dan

I know what you mean about books that are hyped. I sometimes reject them on that basis alone. I think these one may have some relevance for you though given your recent migration.

Another aspect of slavery and our civil war is the unfortunate tendency to "blame the victims". I think this gave rise to "Jim Crow".

I was reminded of this by a German woman I knew some years ago. While not old enough to remember WWII, she was steeped in family lore. This included family women engaging in prostitution to feed their families during our occupation. She was very intelligent and had several degrees from notable European universities. I remember being startled by her announcement that "everything would have been fine if the Jews had just left when we told them to". I have wondered how many shared this opinion.