> Section 1 > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
So XIII explicitly allows for criminals to be worked without reward. Of course equating that with chattel slavery (which was prohibited by XIII)...
And its purpose is specially for a slave population.
Some developed nations have reevaluated this, to have convicts be rehabilitated and more collaborative members of society. And the inhumane conditions in the US prisons - for slaves - being valid arguments to prevent extradition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorative_justice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehabilitative_justice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformative_justice
> How did the 13th amendment codify slavery?
It codified it the above sense.
You can say “it codified [slavery] in the above sense”, but obviously this isn’t the sense that people meant when they went to war to end slavery. And neither you nor I had to make the sacrifice that those people made to end what they considered to be slavery in the US.
Maybe it’s worth considering what the purpose of the 13th amendment was? It’d be a pretty huge mistake to conclude that the purpose of passing the 13th amendment was to enshrine slavery in law, which so many people fought and died to abolish, right?
That's the last I'll respond to you about this topic.
I love it when this one gets pulled out. UH OH, NO MORE RESPONSES!
Well I'm also happy to leave it here, that the 13th amendment absolutely outlawed slavery and that people arguing for policy changes in law enforcement are making a weak case that their poorly justified agenda is somehow on par (or even more morally virtuous) with the 19th century abolitionists.
NOW I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME.
Freed slaves also were unfairly scrutinized for eligibility to vote. Does that mean we should never work to guarantee the integrity of our voting systems?
https://corpaccountabilitylab.org/calblog/2020/8/5/private-c...
Some people might argue that we should pursue even more extreme punishments, to dissuade people from committing crimes.
So your idea exacerbates the thing you want to dissuade.
The concept is called recidivism if you are interested in corroborating or learning additional perspectives of this. And why it occurs such as the misaligned incentives that promote recidivism that we as a society can fix.
Maybe it's actually wrong?
Disagreements on values often masquerade as disagreements on facts, especially because people often use fact claims oriented to their audience’s perceived values to sell actions based on different values to them.
you're looking at this through the lens of more enforcement+penalties versus less enforcement+penalties, a false dilemma that's not what the rest of us are talking about.