I made an error. I said "...wouldn't the conclusion be that the other members of mankind...be good?" "Be good" is wrong grammatically (because "be good" just doesn't make sense) and what I meant is are good. I'm sorry I made the mistake. So with that correction in mind, what do you think about that sentence?
You said you agree there always are people trying to control people. Yes, but my statement is different than yours. I say the people who are controlling are the same people, rather, a lineage of people, not just anyone because anyone would be arbitrary and not withstand observation today and history as opposed to the history taught worldwide in government schools or schools governments influence, accidental history.
The difference between our arguments is large. Because I identify a small group of people who believe they have a calling to enslave everyone and that your argument is vague in that it doesn't identify a people, thereby saying everyone is bad (read: man is bad), it's necessary our conclusions differ from each other and that our premises differ, one of which I hope you reply to because it's corrected.
To the issue of slaves discovering they are slaves, well, I think it's good depending on circumstances. Yes, I know that sentence invites more discussion, which we can have, but without your asking for it, I won't go into it.
"[Slavery] is bad! Why does this happen over and over again? Because our nature is bad. In fact, if those who were slaves became free, history also teaches us they do the EXACT same thing to others that was done to them."
Your assertion here is why I used the word ignorance. Before I go further, know that I don't say it to denigrate you. I say it because I take words literally. I try to use the right words. Onward. Because I said "ignorance" is that your post is absent crucial information about history: the money changers. I know and I bet you know they control an inordinate amount of things on this planet. That control is bound to affect everyone. That affect, however, is false. False how? Why, just look: It goes and goes and goes and, assuming the controller want to enslave everyone still, can finish only when everyone not the controllers are enslaved so they, the slaves, cannot rebel, hence what I said, that there can be no substantial lapse in the falsity, in the peddling of lies.
That is why I mentioned the environment the falsity occurs in: consolidation. This environment, though, is a process, really. The environment is contrivance, unnatural, placing people in it to compete against each other instead of living with one another, a rat race, you could say. To help understand this environment, please click the link I put in my comment you replied to, where DPer tamckissick in his/her second paragraph succinctly explained the economy's involvement in human behavior.
So, the players are the money changers and their mode is consolidation. Without you acknowledging these two factors, our courses of thought must conclude differently. So, sarx, do you acknowledge the money changers and their using consolidation since at least Jesus' time?
As for your want to create a system to ensure slavery prohibition, expand on it so I can comment on it. It's too broad of a comment for me to comment on. Thanks and talk with you later.
School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me
Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton