Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!orb
From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Re: Rawls's Theory of Justice and Slavery
Message-ID: <586@whuxl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Apr-85 08:25:09 EST
Article-I.D.: whuxl.586
Posted: Thu Apr 11 08:25:09 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Apr-85 03:04:21 EST
References: <576@whuxl.UUCP>, <3532@alice.UUCP> <5427@utzoo.UUCP>, <579@whuxl.UUCP> <5451@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: /usr/exptools/lib/netnews/myorg
Lines: 37

> Tim,
> you would win your bet now. You would lose your bet in 1860. You cannot
> cry ``rationalisation'' at everybody who disagrees with you. In 1860 I
> could find many sincere people who, given that they were Black, would
> prefer to be Christian slaves than free heathens. If you accept that
> slavery is part of the natural order of things (something which I do not)
> and you think that the institution of slavery is just (something which
> I do not) then it makes sense to believe that, if you were born Black
> then your choices would be to be a heathen in Africa or a slave in
> the civilised world. From that perspective, it makes sense for a White
> to say that ``If I had been born Black, I would like to be one of my slaves''.
> 
> Laura Creighton
> utzoo!laura

Come now Laura!  Be reasonable!  Tell me how many slaves refused to be
released from slavery.  Then look at how many former slaves went on to
fight for the Union forces.  Tell me how many whites, seeing the "justice"
of slavery volunteered to be slaves themselves.  The question is not one
of "do whites believe blacks are better off as slaves".  The question is
"would whites want to be slaves".  I think the unequivocal answer is: NO.
Equality does not mean "equality for Aryans and other distinguished human
beings".  Equality means equality for ALL human beings: which means that
whites cannot consider the question for blacks but for themselves as whites.
They must consider the question as : given that I am a wealthy white slaveowner
would I agree to switch positions with one of my black slaves?
Do you see the difference here?  Between saying "If I were black I can imagine
that it is possible that I might prefer slavery to my other alternative of
poverty" (a rationalization which only makes sense given that one is already
presented very unequal alternatives being black in the first place) 
OR 
"As the white person I actually am, would I be willing to trade places with
 a slave?"
I think this an excellent way of cutting through to justice and fairness.

               "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander!"
                tim sevener   whuxl!orb