Because I'm generally aware of western economic and political history from 1600-1800. I'm not conflating them, they were in fact conflated.
Soviet russian and chinese industrialization was different, but later and not relevant to the Atlantic slave trade that parent poster was talking about.
> Soviet russian and chinese industrialization was different
Of course. "Industrialization requires profit, except when it doesn't". Got it.
> but later and not relevant to the Atlantic slave trade that parent poster was talking about.
I didn't realize they used steam ships to transport slaves from Africa to Americas, where they made them work in factories to produce industrial goods.
There is no ideological war, it is just an unfounded statement that has no direct line of reasoning. What does slavery have to do with industrialization? There weren't slaves in many pre-industrial societies. And the fact that you switched 'industrialization' for 'profit maximizing businesses' as if no one would notice (then acknowledging that communists did figure out how to do it) makes me wonder if you even thought about for more than a few seconds.
I was under the impression that most pre-industrial societies had slavery. Or at least most societies that were successful.
The Bible has passages on how to be a moral slave owner.
As far as conflating industrialization with capitalism, I'm sorry, I'm actually very far left politically but this is just a fact. It's underappreciated in the west that 5 year plans worked well, but they were following a template 200 years, 2 full centuries, later. 100 years after successful British capitalists banned slavery.
You can be under any impression you want but that doesn't make you not completely wrong. The Bible is not a history book, and if it was, it wouldn't be the only one.
And calling 'industrialization' 'capitalism' and 'profit maximizing business' all the same thing and then shrugging it off after getting called out, you are just showing that you ignorant of what any of it means. And your last two sentences are non-sensical -- I literally cannot figure out what 5 year plans have to do with slavery in the west.
I'm not calling those things the same at all. I actually draw distinctions between them. But there's a historical record of how they happened together after not happening separately for thousands of years.
There's a principle of charity when reading that you may want to consider.
Sorry but you don't get charity when you are asserting a point which is completely unfounded. Please find something which will back up your point besides 'they all happened at once' because that isn't even true. There is no correlation with 'capitalism' 'industry' and 'profit' with 'demise of slavery'. I beg you to look up what was happening in the Congo by Belgium when the automobile was being popularized.
There happens to be a correlation with a bunch of nice things because we happen to live in the modern era, but you can't attribute everything to capitalism because, as we noted it was not the only system in place which did these things.
I would like you to find some scholarly research which can bolster your theory.
Before industrialization, slavery and serfdom are common for thousands of years.
After industrialization, it goes away within 1-200 years every place that industrialized. Probably because it's not economical anymore in the presence of industrial production.
You're saying that this observation is so out of pocket that it doesn't deserve a charitable hearing?
Sure -- it makes sense in the same way that it makes sense industrialization got rid of eunuchs. A barbaric practice has died out in certain parts of the world because we live in the modern age.
To say that wouldn't have happened without industrialization, which wouldn't have happened without profit maximization, which wouldn't have happened without capitalism, is not logical. There is nothing inherent in capitalism which requires profit maximization at the expense of humans, it just requires exploitation of private property (note exploitation here means 'being used' not 'being used in a necessarily harmful manner). There is nothing inherent in industrialization which requires profit maximization, it just requires a cheap source of energy and labor and a market (note that this can be a planned market as in communism, or a market in which the demand is created only for war production and is fed by looting conquered territory, as the fascists did in WWII).
And there is nothing which precludes slavery existing because any of those other things exist. In fact, there were massive amounts of slaves who toiled under Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in the modern era, and we only don't have them now because they lost the war.
My "theory" is a straightforward recollection of the way things did in fact happen, on this planet and in this universe. Europeans started the industrial ball rolling with for profit companies. Sorry if you don't like it.
