So is Johannesburg really better off since Apartheid?

[QP!]

Slave laborers are slaves. Prison laborers are prisoners. I suggest you use more precise terms. Clearly, no slave master would require their slaves to watch the news and study legal knowledge every evening. Your mistake is that you deliberately confuse everything at will. You are using language in a very authoritarian way. Perhaps you are not aware of this yourself.

again you seem to not understand that the Slaves in the US south were prisoners even if they never stayed in a physical prison.

You are simply wrong to think a prisoner has to be in a prison or jail structure. You do not understand the language you are using.,

A prisoner can be held in a house. A prisoner can be held in a jail. A prisoner can come and go from a house somewhat freely.

Slave labor is the FORCED WORK and not the structure and you are simply wrong to assert otherwise.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Real prison life is very regimented. You sleep early, eat a bland diet (low salt, low fat — not necessarily tasty from a Chinese perspective, but irreproachable from a health standpoint), watch the news every evening, and study legal knowledge. It is a monotonous and dull place, but one that truly allows a person to quiet down and reshape their soul. Labor is just a part of it — you even get paid. Think of it like being a student: the school requires you to take physical education classes. You have to complete a 1000-meter run test every semester. No one actually considers that being a 'running slave.'

Sounds like you have personal experience.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

again you seem to not understand that the Slaves in the US south were prisoners even if they never stayed in a physical prison.

You are simply wrong to think a prisoner has to be in a prison or jail structure. You do not understand the language you are using.,

A prisoner can be held in a house. A prisoner can be held in a jail. A prisoner can come and go from a house somewhat freely.

Slave labor is the FORCED WORK and not the structure and you are simply wrong to assert otherwise.

No, slaves weren't. Differences include:

Slaves were never tried or convicted of anything.

Convicts had a set sentence to do. They were then released. Slavery was for life.

Prisoners were held in prisons. If they were sent out on a work gang, they were usually shackled the whole time and under close guard. Slaves usually weren't because, at least in the Old South, could be identified by their skin color as a starting point.

 

[QP!]

No, slaves weren't. Differences include:

Slaves were never tried or convicted of anything.

Convicts had a set sentence to do. They were then released. Slavery was for life.

Prisoners were held in prisons. If they were sent out on a work gang, they were usually shackled the whole time and under close guard. Slaves usually weren't because, at least in the Old South, could be identified by their skin color as a starting point.

no one is saying there are not differences.

What i am saying is slaves were prisoners. A prisoner is a person who does not control their freedom.

So if a slave is a prisoner who is forced to do labor that is slave labor.

If a person in china is a prisoner and forced to do labor that is slave labor.

Trying to make any distinction otherwise is meaningless as i am NOT SAYING one person did not end up in that position of being a prisoner due to committing a crime and the other ended up their due to the skin color. That is the reason they ARE a prisoner but they are both prisoners and as a result of becoming a prisoner they are forced to do labor.

 

[Jack Grealish]

again you seem to not understand that the Slaves in the US south were prisoners even if they never stayed in a physical prison.

You are simply wrong to think a prisoner has to be in a prison or jail structure. You do not understand the language you are using.,

A prisoner can be held in a house. A prisoner can be held in a jail. A prisoner can come and go from a house somewhat freely.

Slave labor is the FORCED WORK and not the structure and you are simply wrong to assert otherwise.

Let me put it bluntly. The reason Americans insist on describing the fact that Chinese prisoners participate in labor as 'slave labor' is not because of any overlap between the concepts of prison and slavery. Rather, the word 'slavery' allows people to imagine that process as something miserable, painful, and inhumane to the greatest extent possible.

You are using the vagueness of language developed within the context of American history to forcibly impose it on the completely different social realities of other countries, while completely ignoring the local and widely held views of the people in those countries regarding the matter in question. This itself is a form of linguistic and ideological authoritarianism.

This is why the American left, who preach 'freedom' every day, are so hated in this country. Because you do not truly value freedom. At the level of language and thought, you are nothing short of authoritarians.

 

[QP!]

lets put this another way looking at it thru the tradition of other forms of slaves such as Greek and Italian (Roman).

You could end up being a slave due to your ethnicity, due to being conquered in war, due to having unpaid family debt, due to committing a crime.

Any of those reasons individually could see you committed to a slaves life, and some might involve incarceration and others not. But you still were a slave. And if you were forced to do labor that is slave labor.

 

[QP!]

Let me put it bluntly. The reason Americans insist on describing the fact that Chinese prisoners participate in labor as 'slave labor' is not because of any overlap between the concepts of prison and slavery. Rather, the word 'slavery' allows people to imagine that process as something miserable, painful, and inhumane to the greatest extent possible.

You are using the vagueness of language developed within the context of American history to forcibly impose it on the completely different social realities of other countries, while completely ignoring the local and widely held views of the people in those countries regarding the matter in question. This itself is a form of linguistic and ideological authoritarianism.

This is why the American left, who preach 'freedom' every day, are so hated in this country. Because you do not truly value freedom. At the level of language and thought, you are nothing short of authoritarians.

you can go deal with your demons and assumptions elsewhere as i do not care.

I will continue to use the language properly and as designed and if your demons tell you i am doing it for reasons other than being accurate that is on you.

See my post above which gives more historical context to what a prisoner and slave can be defined as.

 

[Jack Grealish]

you can go deal with your demons and assumptions elsewhere as i do not care.

I will continue to use the language properly and as designed and if your demons tell you i am doing it for reasons other than being accurate that is on you.

See my post above which gives more historical context to what a prisoner and slave can be defined as.

Typical American leftist.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

no one is saying there are not differences.

What i am saying is slaves were prisoners. A prisoner is a person who does not control their freedom.

The difference is, a prisoner is someone who had their freedom taken through a process because of something they did that society finds unacceptable. An example would be murder.

Slaves are forced into servitude often through no fault of their own. Or, they became slaves to pay off debts they owed.

So if a slave is a prisoner who is forced to do labor that is slave labor.

It's a fine line but there is a difference.

If a person in china is a prisoner and forced to do labor that is slave labor.

Only if that person is a political or other non-criminal.

Trying to make any distinction otherwise is meaningless as i am NOT SAYING one person did not end up in that position of being a prisoner due to committing a crime and the other ended up their due to the skin color. That is the reason they ARE a prisoner but they are both prisoners and as a result of becoming a prisoner they are forced to do labor.

There is a distinction, and it is a fine line. But there is that distinction.

 

[QP!]

The difference is, a prisoner is someone who had their freedom taken through a process because of something they did that society finds unacceptable. An example would be murder.

Slaves are forced into servitude often through no fault of their own. Or, they became slaves to pay off debts they owed.


It's a fine line but there is a difference.


Only if that person is a political or other non-criminal.

There is a distinction, and it is a fine line. But there is that distinction.

so in your view slaves were not prisoners? They had control of their freedom and movement?

Prisoner:

1
: a person deprived of liberty and kept under involuntary restraint, confinement, or custody

Examples of Prisoners:​

- He was captured by rebel forces and kept as their prisoner for several months before they set him free
- The families were held prisoner for four days.
- someone incarcerated by a legal system

------------


Again i am not saying the reason the reason a person becomes a prisoner is always the same.

A person can become a prisoner due to skin color. A person can become a prisoner for all the reasons i name above in the Roman/Greek context.

They are ALL prisoners and their labor when forced is slave labor.

 

[QP!]

Terry do you know your history?

The history of how someone could be taken as a prisoner and slave in the Greek/Roman context i mention above?

Are you saying they were wrong to call them all prisoners and slaves while recognizing the distinction you mention (and i am not arguing against) that people can get to the point of being a prisoner and slave by differing means and it is not just due to committing a crime or your skin color?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

so in your view slaves were not prisoners? They had control of their freedom and movement?

In many cases slaves had some degree of freedom of movement and could work and live in open society. Prisoners and penal labor are often paid some amount for their work.

Prisoner:

1
: a person deprived of liberty and kept under involuntary restraint, confinement, or custody

Examples of Prisoners:​

- He was captured by rebel forces and kept as their prisoner for several months before they set him free
- The families were held prisoner for four days.
- someone incarcerated by a legal system

------------


Again i am not saying the reason the reason a person becomes a prisoner is always the same.

A person can become a prisoner due to skin color. A person can become a prisoner for all the reasons i name above in the Roman/Greek context.

They are ALL prisoners and their labor when forced is slave labor.

In a penal setting, those incarcerated were found guilty of some crime defined by society. Usually, today, prisoners are required to work and receive some amount of pay for that work along with free room and board so-to-speak. Their term of imprisonment is set by the courts. Work is mandated because the alternative is far, far, worse for society.

Putting people in prison to rot and do nothing degrades their ability to reenter society. It creates more mental and physical ailments. So, to both keep the prisoner healthier work is required. Many prison systems require prisoners to get some education too, like a GED if they don't have a high school diploma, or drug and addiction avoidance education courses.

Slaves are unpaid. Slaves can be bought and sold as chattel. Prisoners cannot.

 

[QP!]

In many cases slaves had some degree of freedom of movement and could work and live in open society. Prisoners and penal labor are often paid some amount for their work.

In a penal setting, those incarcerated were found guilty of some crime defined by society. Usually, today, prisoners are required to work and receive some amount of pay for that work along with free room and board so-to-speak. Their term of imprisonment is set by the courts. Work is mandated because the alternative is far, far, worse for society.

Putting people in prison to rot and do nothing degrades their ability to reenter society. It creates more mental and physical ailments. So, to both keep the prisoner healthier work is required. Many prison systems require prisoners to get some education too, like a GED if they don't have a high school diploma, or drug and addiction avoidance education courses.

Slaves are unpaid. Slaves can be bought and sold as chattel. Prisoners cannot.

No slaves had no real degree of freedom of movement as it was all proscribed by their owner. Meaning an owner telling you, you are free to do certain things is NOT freedom as they control that thru permissions. So if you are saying their owner would allow some a bit of latitude in what they can do so to is that true of prisons and parole issues. I worked in a prison, as mentioned above and know first hand some prisoners were granted some freedoms.

So again the distinctions you are making are missing the point.

I AM NOT saying they are the exact same so you keep pointing out the differences is not addressing the point.

I am saying they are BOTH prisoners, meaning they do not have control over their lives for the time they are a slave or jailed person. They BOTH operate within the rules and confines of another persons dictates. The degree of difference in what that person in control allows IS NOT a meaningful difference to my point here. The point being the prisoner or slave does not have that control of their freedom or incarceration and the other person has it entirely.

I am saying that if you were taken in Roman or Greek culture :

- because your family owed money they could not pay
- because you stole something
- because you were captured in battle
- because you had the wrong skin color

In EACH AND EVERY INSTANCE you were a Prisoner and Slave. The labor you would do in EACH AND EVERY instance was slave labor.,

Do you disagree? Do you see why pointing out the difference of why they are a prisoner and slave (criminal, family debt, captured, etc) does not change what i said prior?

 

[Diesel]

Joburg’s infrastructure crisis worsens as City spends just 26% of capital budget

Civil society groups say Johannesburg’s failure to spend billions allocated for infrastructure repairs reflects deeper governance problems — even as burst pipes, failing electricity networks and deter…

www.dailymaverick.co.za

I think we can all agree that the leadership was bad, but they kept the water running.

Why is it these largely black run places are such shit holes?

Now our JPP friends won't want to address the content and will just start slinging around the word RACIST because that is all they know how to do.

The article is behind a registration wall, but you seem to be asking about the state capacity failure.

Johannesburg has a rapid turnover of local officials. Political instability leads to constant leadership churn. Large projects never get done because they take 5-15 years to plan and deliver, which process is interrupted by new leadership and replacing senior managers.

Key technical posts are filled based on political alignment rather than expertise. Engineers with highly technical skills get replaced by generalists with no institutional memory who fear political consequences for their decisions.

Procurement rules are risk-paralyzing and create defensive bureaucracy.

Johannesburg has payment-compliance problems that harm municipal revenue.

Brain drain of engineers and skilled staff has created a knowledge gap.

Corruption and fear of corruption creates a vicious loop.

Most of the infrastructure was built around the same time and is reaching end-of-life all at once creating a maintenance cliff.

 

[Jarod]

Riggghhhhhtttt

Those of African blood are.