People always talk about slavery, such as the trans-Atlantic slave trade, as being a bad thing, this is cited in countless textbooks for teenagers, as well as several pop-culture documentaries, etc. (sources can be provided if needed) but I never understood why many people feel this is such a bad thing, I mean, it's offering:
free labor to make products, which in turn allows the products to be sold at cheaper prices, which in turn allows poor families to more easily survive and live off of resources they might not have been able to and
it provides a safe and reliable, sturdy home-living environment for the slaves, with sufficient food and basic medical care, during the great depression there are some personal accounts from ex-slaves saying when they were a slave they never went hungry, as opposed to in the depression
Some people argue that just the idea of "owning a person" is inherently immoral and should never be accepted in any society, but the thing is this same standard doesn't apply to American citizens themselves, for example, in regards to the FATCA laws, requiring US citizens to pay taxes to the US even with money made outside of the country, essentially because citizens are considered "property" of the government, and has been considered human rights abuse:
"It is the natural consequence of a citizenship which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government."
even though its "optional" in the sense that one can pay a lot of money to remove one's citizenship, but one could make a similar argument for slavery, that if the slave somehow got enough money to redeem himself, he could also be free, but it's just really impractical for slaves to do that because they can't own money, etc.
Another example is the prison system, where the inmates are obligated to work in some cases, and for sure aren't "free", it could be argued that they deserve it because of what they did, but that would go against the moral that its wrong to "ever own any human being", it would then change to "its wrong to own a human being who didn't do anything wrong, or for no reason", but the slave owners will argue based on religious grounds that the slave's ancestors molested Noach (Noah,n English) after the flood and castrated him, not allowing him to have a fourth son (who would have been an entire nation of the world etc) so their souls require atonement though slavery, so there is a reason behind it according to them, one would then need to disprove the historical narratives of the bible in order to make a valid case against them, which hasn't been done
Another point is the reasoning behind "owning a person", I haven't heard it explained what is so bad about it anyway, even if the people didn't do anything to deserve being owned, I mean everyone takes advantage of everyone, just look at the capitalist society of the rich getting ahead, etc., it's not the same as owning but it is the same as abuse and power-grabbing, doesn't the world work in a way of the stronger overtaking the weaker, isn't that just the circle of life? Even animals fight with each other over things, people have always had wars with each other to gain land, etc., and those wars either resulted in the mass murdering of the population, or the population being transformed into slaves, it just seems like the natural way the world was meant to work, is there any reason to assume it's not?
Therefore, can't strong arguments be made for 'There is nothing inherently wrong with slavery'?