US prison slaves produce $11B worth of goods and services | Hacker News Reader

US prison slaves produce $11B worth of goods and services

thehill.com

67 pointstrasz61 comments

Knowing Better on YouTube produced a really good documentary answering "when was the last slave freed?" [^1]. His argument is that it didn't end until 1942, a mere 80 years ago. A big part of the reason why was the prison system and legal system, which was structured around criminalizing blackness, and using this to fulfill an economic need. Articles like this make me think perhaps 1942 may be a bit optimistic, after all, we still rely heavily on prison labour without allowing incarcerated people to earn sufficient funds to support themselves after their rehabilitation, and we're still fighting the war on drugs that started under Nixon.

That said, I'm not sure how non Americans feel about US politics being discussed here, since I rarely see news about domestic issues in other countries.

[^1]: https://youtu.be/j4kI2h3iotA

https://eji.org/news/history-racial-injustice-prison-labor/

The Thirteenth Amendment, ratified in 1865, made slavery and involuntary servitude unconstitutional in the United States “except as punishment for crime.”

The U.S. prison system may be America's greatest modern moral catastrophe.

This should be flagged due to misleading title change.

What part of the title is misleading? the HN title fixes simply removes some inaccurate language from the original article.

'inmates' is a more accurate descriptor. A 'slave' could refer to anyone being forced to work for no pay, whereas an inmate means that as well as a bunch of other relevant stuff.

Slaves often became that way by violating the customs of their native lands. In the US, the state calls people who violate codified customs "criminals."

This is an interesting, blunt, perspective. Thanks!

In this case, the difference in "inmate" and "slave" is the degree of charitableness given to the US. On articles concerning China's Uighur camps, we don't see the word "inmate" being used.

I think 'slave' is overly negative usage in this case. A 'slave' implies people that were enslaved with no justification, imo. You don't normally hear POWs or inmates referred to as slaves. The fact that inmates are made to work is hardly the worst part of their punishment.

> A 'slave' implies people that were enslaved with no justification

it absolutely does not, and to suggest so is absurd. In America, black people have been enslaved with all sorts of justifications about how they were of an "inferior race", how they were "naturally" more violent and "animalistic", etc and how their enslavement was actually good for them.

Those were rationalizations. Nobody thinks enslavement like that is justified.

Well people certainly thought so at the time. Personally I don't believe the rationalization given for modern slavery either, but apparently you do so it's a "justified" slavery.

Implying that sometimes it’s justified to enslave people?

Well, yea, what else can you do with violent murderers and the like? Or POWs?

You understand we're not just talking about putting people in jail, right? We're talking about FORCING them to work? From the article:

> The ACLU also found that more than 76 percent of incarcerated workers surveyed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics say that “they are required to work or face additional punishments such as solitary confinement, denial of opportunities to reduce their sentence, and loss of family visitation.”

There are a lot of gray areas around imprisoning people. I (like all other apes and probably most intelligent animals in the world) believe 'eye for an eye' is basically the embodiment of true justice. Everything else is a mix of punishment and practicality. The fact that inmates are forced to work is so low on the level of what their punishment is, that it doesn't even register in my book. I think most inmates actually like having jobs to do. From what you cited, it sounds like if they don't like it, they can just sit in solitary instead. And as far as rehabilitation goes, it seems like an essential ingredient.

It would definitely be nice to give them a decent wage, but I think this is an area where practicality matters as well- prisons cost money and man-hours. I don't know about the economics, but getting rid of for-profit prisons seems like a good idea.

You do realize that a huge percentage of violent criminals are never caught right?

Prisoners of war generally have more legal protections against slavery than those incarcerated under the US justice system.

> What part of the title is misleading? the HN title fixes simply removes some inaccurate language from the original article.

The HN title is editorialized by injecting tendentious and controversial framing not present in the OP article let alone the OP title.

It's not even accurate, these practices seem far closer to "involuntary servitude" than "slavery." The term "slave," at least in the American context, implies being chattel, which none of these prisoners are.

For the record, here's the OP title:

> US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’

And here's the current HN post title: "US prison slaves produce $11B worth of goods and services."

Titles aren't supposed to be editorlized in general on HN. I think there are some cases where it's ok, perhaps if the title is particularly nonsensical or clickbaity.

Actual title is:US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’

What's wrong with the title? The original title is: "US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’". I'm not sure if the part of the title they left out misleads the reader.

What makes you think that they aren't slaves?

A _lot_ of folks believe that the US banned slavery within its borders.

Which is why correcting that harmful, false narrative is critical

Countries "ban" all sorts of things with the government being exempted from the ban.

Some animals are more equal.

". . . the government takes up to 80 percent of the pay for room and board, court costs, restitution and other fees, including the construction and maintenance of prisons."

Where is the balance between incarceration being punitive versus rehabilitative?

In the future, hopefully, but probably in the distant future. It is common to hear about people "getting what they deserve" but very uncommon to hear a hope that the criminal becomes a better member of society.

The embarrassment of it all is this: a study of global prison systems and their efficacy tells us what our governments should be doing. If we want to improve recidivism rates, we can look around at this world and do something better. If we want to inflict more punishment, there’s no end to the examples of inhumane torture. If we want to turn it into a profitable big-business slavery farm and factory system, we can find free-market exemplars. We, our government, need to temper the amoral economic system if we wish to avoid having slavery-adjacent for-profit businesses running amuck on our land.

Reposted since it appears to have been flagged for the title edit:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31783508

You can refuse work in prison. You will be punished, but I think it’s a little bit less harsh than slavery. The prison system does not own the inmates, they are not property, and the prison inmates do have rights. Slaves had no rights. So all this might look good for sensationalism, it’s not entirely accurate.

You should be clear that slaves who refuse to work are tortured.

Can someone from the US chime in on what is their opinion of The Hill?

I have an idea who they are and who are their main target, but I would be grateful for an additional POV.

thehill updates quite frequently with the days inside baseball and I find their non-opinion articles to be decent. Their opinion pieces are complete trash and really hurt their brand.

They seem generally to stick to the facts. The kinds of stories they run usually appeal to a more center/left crowd.

As some evidence, The Hill shows up ever so slightly left center in both of these bias charts, with a pretty good "factual" score:

https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart

https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/

It's a right wing internet site, that sometimes shows some left ideas that are usually critical of the "left" democratic party in what seems like a cynical ploy to horseshoe theory some leftists in the country while usually interleaving that content with some content that is basically right out of the republican messaging for the day from the GOP.

This one disappeared from the front page real quick

Too "political."

yep. Those darn liberals calling "voluntary" labor slavery.

I wouldn't really consider prison labor "voluntary."

Yes, technically one could choose solitary confinement, loss of even what few privileges one has as an inmate, or never be allowed to see one's family again, but that's like putting a gun to someone's head and claiming they "voluntarily" signed a contract because they could just as well have chosen to have their brains splattered across the wall.

Plus, it is explicitly a continuation of slavery per the Thirteenth Amendment.

Nor would I. I was sarcastically making fun of the incredible brain rot on this stupid website. What's being done to these people is monstrous and the monsters who profit off of it will never know even the slightest discomfort, not to mention be appropriately punished for their behavior.

Sorry, this site has made it impossible for me to detect sarcasm anymore...

All good, I edited my comment to shuffle the quotes around which should help. This site is hell.

But if it were about the income generated by China's incarcerated Uighur population, it most certainly wouldn't have disappeared so quickly.

Thanks China

yep, slavery definitely isn't an age old American tradition, it's China's fault!

This can't be true. We criticize China for prison labor. That would be like someone who beats their own children criticizing someone else for beating their own children.

Phil Ochs - Another Country

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9Ty66Z3mvk

The difference is that we (America) can change China and the Indo-Pacific, but not the US prison system. Something about balance of powers, executive branch balanced by whatever it wants...maybe I'm misremembering what I learned in school though.

Anyway, it's just common sense. I believe we have the tools to change things in that area of the world, but not domestically. Our hands our tied here, so how will we deal with the fact that hundreds of thousands of citizens do commit crimes that lead to long sentences. If we don't jail a few hundred thousand of these people, then will it lead to problems in society or the economy? Inflation is already hard enough on the rich and poor. Around Xinjiang, we have more tools available to stop the prison labor there, like industry sanctions.

The ROI of working on Xinjiang is higher than the ROI: the conditions there are worse according to what I've read and we have more powerful tools at our disposal. So, let's keep our head clear and focused on China.

(Hopefully it's clear I don't truly believe what I wrote. It just sounds logical to me.)

>...The difference is that we (America) can change China and the Indo-Pacific, but not the US prison system.

I'm not sure how ending prison slavery abroad in a sovereign country is supposedly easier than ending it at home, especially in a country that rambles incessantly about "freedom". The fact of the matter is that much of the US population likes the system, and by focusing on China, we don't have to acknowledge that offensive fact.

Was he being sarcastic? I'm not sure. He may have been trying to sarcastically say that our political climate doesn't realistically allow this to change?

> We criticize China for prison labor.

The biggest criticism for China is the reasons people are put into prison labor programs.

> This can't be true. We criticize China for prison labor. That would be like someone who beats their own children criticizing someone else for beating their own children.

My understanding is that the criticisms are not so much that prisoners are used for labor, but the so-called crimes that got them into prison (e.g. being a Uyghur who practices Islam in Xinjiang, criticizing the government) shouldn't be crimes at all.

Police have higher rates of domestic violence than the general populace. Do you want to stop police from apprehending those who beat their family?

Seems fair for a hypocrite to call out another hypocrite. Maybe by some sort of miracle a self-corrective loop can emerge.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com