The argument that slavery was fully abolished in the 19th century is misguiding. Kevin Bales explains that variants of the old forms of slavery have evolved to contemporary slavery. Simply stated, slavery still exists in modern world. A distinct difference between the two is the fact that legal ownership of people has been abolished. In the contemporary slavery, slave owners have come up with different mechanisms to peacefully recruit slaves. However, the poor working conditions, poor pays and physical and sexual abuse still exist in contemporary slavery.
Bales argues that slavery has evolved into new variants. Contemporary slavery or “new slavery” as Bales calls it is different from other forms of slavery experienced in the old days. For instance, in the Atlantic slave trade, people had legal ownership of slaves who were expensive and thus long-term investment. A distinct feature of the old slavery was that the slave was racially different from a slave master. Old slavery reflected rural economies of the old days .
“New Slavery” as referred to by Bales is basically brought about by greed and selfish profit-making motives. Therefore in contemporary slavery, slaves are not controlled by legal ownership but through violence since they are easily dispensable. Bales comes to the conclusion that slavery still exists in all countries
…show more content…
The only variant that appears to have changed completely is the illegalization of owning people. In the old slavery, acquisition of slaves through open market bidding was legal and thus slave masters owned slaves just like property . Acquisition of slaves in the old days was expensive and thus seen as an investment. In contemporary slavery, slaves are acquired cheaply. Other factors appear to have changed slightly. As explained in the following