People likely voted for not repealing the provision allowing involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime and not for keeping slavery.
Whoever thought combining those two things in one vote was a good idea is an idiot
No, it’s a form of punishment. It can be avoided by not committing crimes.
Nah, slavery is still slavery. Tons of US businesses are currently propped up by prisoner workers who they don’t have to pay practically anything, and who can’t walk off the job, and who can’t really complain too much, AND, conveniently, aren’t employed by that company so they can bypass labor laws like break times, safety regulations, and working hours.
You should read literally anything about the US prison industry, mass incarceration, or war on drugs. The fact that America has the world’s largest prison population, that companies make money from this, and that the people who get imprisoned are largely non-white couldn’t possibly be related right?
You’re making the following statements, lmk if this is inaccurate:
-Involuntary servitude is not considered slavery, but rather a punishment.
-Involuntary servitude is OK as long as it’s used on prisoners (those who have been convicted of crimes).
Inference made: Constitutional protections and rights do NOT apply to those going against the rule of law.
Questions for you:
-If involuntary servitude isn’t considered slavery, then what would you consider slavery to be?
-Is this a form of punishment that helps to reform and correct those deemed currently unsuitable for society (without going into the meaninglessness of Orwellian naming conventions, they are called the “Department of Corrections”, aren’t they?)
-Do you think the rule of law always corresponds with ethical standards?
-I always like to ask myself the following: Who stands to benefit from allowing slaver- I mean, “involuntary servitude” to continue to be allowed? Who stands to benefit from all this cheap labor?
I’m curious as to your answers here.
Let me know if you change your position on that if you’re ever convicted and sentenced to prison for a crime you did not commit.
Maybe we should be treating people humanely regardless of their criminal record? They are in prison to become reformed citizens, not to be our slave laborers.
You can be enslaved in the US for the crime of not having enough money to afford a place to live.
…what other slavery currently exists (legally) that this would have addressed? This isn’t combining two things. Barring slavery in any form includes punitive servitude. Calling them separate issues is like calling “we should fix this leak” a separate concern from “this pipe should not have any leaks”.
Calling them separate issues is like calling “we should fix this leak” a separate concern from “this pipe should not have any leaks”.
Yes, those are two different things that should be addressed separately.
One is emergency plumbing, the other is maintenance.
Looks like people voted no to slavery, but the question asked do you not support slavery.
The answer should have been (yes) I do not support slavery.
Instead (no) I do not support slavery.
I can image a good chunk of people got confused with the wording, and I myself am still confused reading it.
Are you sure? It seems pretty straightforward to me. “This amendment would bar slavery and involuntary servitude.” It’s the first sentence.
I bet the wording on the ballot was different. Similar election results sites for my local ballot measures hasve greatly simplified the language the ballot had (which honestly is probably how ballot measures should be written)
Or maybe Americans are largely shitty people. Stop trying to excuse the behavior and accept it for what it is
You know, reading that today, and putting myself in the shoes of an overworked, everyday American, it seems the wording does leave something to be desired. I wonder how that vote would have turned out if the question were: “Do you support slavery as long as the person was convicted of a crime and is in prison?”
The link you supplied clears it all up. No way anyone could have misunderstood the vote, the ballot even outlines what yes and no mean in the context.
I think I now agree with what krashmo said in the thread below.
“Or maybe Americans are largely shitty people. Stop trying to excuse the behavior and accept it for what it is”
The part that was most surprising to me was this:
ARGUMENTS
PRO Proposition 6 ends slavery in California and upholds human rights and dignity for everyone. It replaces carceral involuntary servitude with voluntary work programs, has bipartisan support, and aligns with national efforts to reform the 13th Amendment. It will prioritize rehabilitation, lower recidivism, and improve public safety, resulting in taxpayer savings.
CON No argument against Proposition 6 was submitted.
No one came out in opposition? Not even the bureau of prisons, or the warden’s union‽‽ And it still didn’t pass?
Edit: I, and all my housemates claim to have, voted for this proposition, and actually all the propositions I had on my ballot in IB to pass. It’s truly disheartening to see that all the other props that mattered less than this one passed, and this one that literally seems to have no downsides is potentially failing.
For reference, the downsides of almost every single other proposition on the IB ballot would increase various taxes, and all of them passed. WTELF you stupid NIMBYS‽‽‽
I think it’ll be a few days before everything is counted, since California is pretty slow. That said, conservative turnout seems pretty high so I wouldn’t be surprised if it fails.
Yeah, we generally are an example of the 5 day rule as I saw a text book call it. Basically nothing is certain until five days after an election. The reason for V days is because it covers a full work week roughly.
Too bad the same can’t be said about the national election this time. Looks like the rent control one isn’t going well either, which is bananas given a majority of voters are renters.
There was a massive push in the last week to tell people it would end all new housing developments, triple rent, and make us all homeless. All of the major newspapers and the governor came out on that line.
Which is ridiculous of course but there was no time to refute it.
In California they have prisoners fight the wildfires. I find it sickening, but it’s a popular program. I wonder if that’s where this result comes from. The wildfires get worse and worse and they need bodies to sacrifice. Depressing.
My thoughts as well.
It’s the wildfires. They don’t want to pay more in taxes to hire more firefighters, at least that’s what makes sense to me.
It’s still an abominably shitty thing and, IMHO, a human rights violation too.
It’s at least a volunteer program, they aren’t directly forcing people to fight the fires. A lot of people, the prisoners included, consider it a way of repaying their debt to society. I’m pretty sure I don’t agree with a great deal of the situation in which it exists, but I do think that if I was in prison, being able to to something, feel like I still matter, would be some comfort.
They don’t want to pay more in taxes to hire more firefighters, at least that’s what makes sense to me.
california is like richer than most countries in the world. dnc and its upper class base is more rotten that i had thought. no wonder 15 million democrats don’t want to vote for these cronies.
That’s a volunteer program. This is inside the prison work and comes with physical and mental punishment if you refuse.
Not exactly “voluntary” in a meaningful way if the alternative is in-prison work or punishment.
Oh no you seem to think I’m defending this so let’s break this down.
You can circumvent the normal prison labor system by volunteering to fight fires. This comes with perks and good time. Or you can exist in the normal prison labor system making products under threat of mental or physical abuse.
So joining the firefighters is also extremely coercive because it requires you to risk your life for your freedom, privileges, and keeping you away from the abusive labor system the other prisoners exist in.
None of this is good.
To be fair, and that’s being very fair, it does end with “allowing involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime” and a case could be made for confusing wording.
Oh wow, that’s actually explained very well. Fair enough, y’all just want slavery I guess lol
But only as a punishment for a crime. Like the new felony theft of a toothbrush from the other proposition we have definitely passed. (Made what was previously misdemeanor theft into felony theft, and yes we still have a 3 strikes law to imprison you for life.)
California is not some progressive bastion. It’s a conservative state that doesn’t bother the LGBTQ community.
I especially enjoy it losing with literally no opponents and no arguments against.
The Arguments section is unfortunately left out on actual ballots. I could see a lot of the less research-inclined citizens interpret that as simple community service and not straight up indentured servitude.
Unfortunately, most things can be attributed to stupidity rather than malice. Had they put the word slavery on the ballots I’d hope we’d see a better split
Everyone gets a booklet with all the analysis and arguments in it, weeks before the election. There is very little that could have been done to make this more clear. At some point it’s just reprehensible. We don’t look back at chattel slavery and hem and haw about education. Neither should we do so here.