Export thread

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/06/lolas-story/524490/?utm_source=fbb

This is an extremely lengthy article about a man talking about the slave woman he grew up with in the latter half of the 20th century, in America. Insanely fascinating. I cannot recommend it more.

I had a family, a career, a house in the suburbs—the American dream. And then I had a slave.

Click to expand...

We spent our first decade in the country trying to fit in. Having a slave did not fit. Having a slave gave me grave doubts about what kind of people we were, what kind of place we came from.

Click to expand...

I have to admit I didn't read through the whole article but, even as I have a couple of beers under my belt, I thought that perhaps I could offer a little commentary to promote (or provoke, take your pick) discussion.

I'm wondering: what is the difference between a slave, and a regular wage worker? At first glance, one could say that the difference is that a slave is forced to do as their master wishes, without being suitably compensated for whatever it is that they do. This is not the historical difference, of course, as no legal ownership relation exists, but we have to make some allowance for the times. Was this lady suitably compensated? Not really. After all, she didn't get paid for her time. Had the family provided her with the allowance that she asked for? Might muddy the waters a little bit, as it could be argued that she and her employer had reached an agreement, and that the family was living up to their end of the bargain. Though I guess that, as far as suitable compensation in a legal sense is concerned, that still would not have been enough, at least not according to what I suppose were the standards for domestic help in the US at the time.

Now, I imagine quite a good number of people in the first world of today feel that they are not being suitably compensated for their time in whatever line of work it is that they do, or at the very least not being provided by their employer with what they need in order to live the lifestyle that they feel is appropriate for the time invested, or at least the minimum acceptable. Are they modern day slaves? IMO, no. They can quit, and go search for better opportunities any time. If there are no better opportunities available for their particular skill set? Well, that is not really the problem of the employer, is it? An employer that was truly invested in their employees or the community might be conscientious about these things, but a poor employer does not need to be, and I doubt anyone could reasonably expect them to be so.

So, how does this relate to the lady in the article? Well, could she have quit? Could she, at one point or another, have packed her bags and said ”f you, I'm out”? I can certainly understand why doing so and going at it alone would have been daunting in her circumstances, but I think it was possible. There would have been no posse to drag her back to her 'owner', who would give her the lash for trying to escape. Perhaps her skills would not have been in high demand, but those are circumstances similar to what many people, who are definitely not slaves and not even illegal mexican gardeners who slipped across the border, are experiencing today.

Any thoughts?

Read this yesterday, it's certainly worth the time.

The HN discussion on the article is, for the most part, also a decent read. In particular the branches about the present conditions of domestic servants in HK, Singapur, and a motley of countries.

Regarding your line of thinking, @TommiR... The exploitation of labor of course exists on a gradient, which individual words can only roughly divide. I think the loss of freedom of movement, particularly as it relates to room & board being your compensation (i.e. you become homeless if you quit the job, and you cannot save up money to make a jump to better conditions), combined with the "always on duty" nature of her servitude are fundamental differences between her condition and that of a contemporary "wage slave". Also worth noting that she was indentured indefinitely and without pay via a voluntary contract. Normal workers cannot sign away that many of their rights (with minor exceptions for professions like prison labor and the military), much less verbally.

It might be more interesting to compare her condition to those encountered in company towns (with the accompanying scrip/chit racket).

Well, the term "wage slave" exists for a reason. In Belgium or Finland you might be able to say "F you, I'm out" and walk away and survive. In the Philippines or the USA - you know, halfway between third and first world countries - this is much harder, as social security is a joke or non existant.
Certainly once she became illegal in the USA, her position was very precarious and similar to that of women forced into prostituion or servitude by withholding their VISA or passports.

Was she a slave? I'd say that's up for debate - she wasn't legally owned, so by that definition, no. By some others, definitely.
Was she a victim of human trafficking? Definitely.

Part of it is, of course, the view that such "full time" jobs are no longer acceptable. My great-aunt was a live-in house maid for a while, and was paid in food and shelter and left over pieces of cloth and the like, but she would never have considered herself a slave. "Rising before the family and going to bed after them", "doing all the menial chores for someone else", they may sound bad to modern ears but aren't in and of themselves horrible or wrong.

Bubble181 said:

Certainly once she became illegal in the USA, her position was very precarious and similar to that of women forced into prostituion or servitude by withholding their VISA or passports.

Click to expand...

Eh... considering they would have likely been deported too, that's not that compelling.

She was a slave because she was kept as one. It's really that simple.

TommiR said:

...could she have quit?

Click to expand...

I don't think she could have. She was 12 when she was taken into isolation and forced servitude, and prior to that had no real education, nor any opportunity for education after. She had no support system to teach her, train her, or help her understand what was possible. So her mind developed, between age 12 and age 25 under threat of violence to work 20 hour days.

It isn't so much a question of being physically held against her will. Her prison was built inside her mind, and as the author demonstrates trying to teach her how to function outside the home, she could not have escaped her own mind even if she wanted to. Like the elephant, trained from youth that the rope could not be broken, never again attempts to tug at the rope, she cannot fathom leaving.

It was only through years of badgering that she could finally unwind some of the patterns she developed and relax.

In my mind this is the worst kind of slavery - child trafficking and training them in a way that prevents them from even comprehending a life away from servitude, nevermind attempting it.

Very well done article.

stienman said:

I don't think she could have. She was 12 when she was taken into isolation and forced servitude, and prior to that had no real education, nor any opportunity for education after. She had no support system to teach her, train her, or help her understand what was possible. So her mind developed, between age 12 and age 25 under threat of violence to work 20 hour days.

It isn't so much a question of being physically held against her will. Her prison was built inside her mind, and as the author demonstrates trying to teach her how to function outside the home, she could not have escaped her own mind even if she wanted to. Like the elephant, trained from youth that the rope could not be broken, never again attempts to tug at the rope, she cannot fathom leaving.

It was only through years of badgering that she could finally unwind some of the patterns she developed and relax.

In my mind this is the worst kind of slavery - child trafficking and training them in a way that prevents them from even comprehending a life away from servitude, nevermind attempting it.

Click to expand...

This is better and more concise than I could have possibly put it.

@Frank thanks for sharing this, it was a stunning read.