well see that's the argument.
screwing you over because of some imagined or promised benefit down the road.
given a cynical look at political promises, etc, I expect that most people would expect no return on that "investment"
well see that's the argument.
Well see that is not the argument that's the conclusion, you are skipping over a step.
screwing you over because of some imagined or promised benefit down the road.
again you are thinking in 1 benefit or 1 positive, the idea behind this assignment was to go into detail.
Looking at historical perspective (not just black US slaves) Slavery had obvious benefits to slaves (housing, food, protection) it's simple as that. The fact that these most often don't weigh up to the negative side-effects is obvious. Things are not black and white, negative things can have positive elements in them. Acknowledging that doesn't make you a supporter slavery, just means you look at things in a critical and detailed manner before you reach a conclusion.
Quick example:
Hitler:
Benefit:
- Massive improvement of industry and infrastructure in Germany.
Negative
- Caused WW2, invaded Europe and massacred a shitload of people
So yeah; bad man, but he actually did some good things.
so you would volunteer for slavery because of implied (or even unpromised) future benefits?
There are also negatives for the slavemaster, housing, food, capital, chance of rebellion etc. Not saying they are big ones but they are there.
Now you are turning it into general benefit question, the teacher asked to list benefits and negatives not a general judgment. As an answer to your question: Quick answer says no, smart answer (especially looking at some historic cases) says: under what kind of circumstances