The main difference is punishing someone who did commit a crime vs someone who did not. As simple as that.
I’m not down playing the Chinese labor camps, I’m taking issue with claiming the prison labor in the US is some moral good. It’s exploiting people, not attempting to rehabilitating them.
I say largely because there are some cases where punishment dictates certain number of hours worked, etc... but we're splitting hairs at this point.
Why aren't inmates paid a "fair" wage? Well, that's up for debate and I think I'd enjoy hearing pros and cons.
Some cons I could think of are:
* These are inmates, serving a sentence as punishment for a crime they were convicted of.
* Most of their living expenses are already provided.
* Alternatives include doing nothing all day instead of a job.
* If inmate labor cost what non-inmate labor costs, why would anyone hire inmates?
* The labor programs are largely voluntary.
* The money earned is used as a reward for participation, good behavior, and showing a willingness to work and get along with other inmates. Misbehave and you don't get to work, and don't earn money.
Now maybe it is time to step up some sort of minimum wage for inmates... but that doesn't distract from atrocities the CCP is committing in present day.
If the gaol sentence is their punishment, why are they being penalised further by reduced wages?
> * If inmate labor cost what non-inmate labor costs, why would anyone hire inmates?
Government-backed incentives. It's in everyone's best interests for people convicted of crimes to have a path back on to the straight-and-narrow. Investing in reducing recidivism is far better value for money than almost any other anti-crime measures.
> * The labor programs are largely voluntary. [...] Alternatives include doing nothing all day instead of a job.
These statements are contradictory.
They are flatly not the same, even if you believe it's debatably exploitive.
You use something that was ended (because people thought it was wrong!) nearly a century ago as supporting evidence for what exactly?
Now the prisoners can get paid some wages in return for labor, in a mostly voluntary labor system.
Unlike the CCP, every inmate had a trial and was found guilty of some crime, and is now repaying their debt to society - as it were.
What did the million Muslims in the article get convicted of in China? Being Muslims? What about the Uyghurs? So now they are slaves for the rest of their lives...
Actually it’s not... did you read it?
The central allegation is that a few thousand Xinjiang Muslims were offered employment possibly in exchange for political indoctrination.
There’s a side allegation that prisoners are also being put to work in factories. There’s no allegation let alone evidence that this is without compensation. And the pennies offered in US prisons hardly count, and certainly don’t absolve the US justice system of the conflict of interest one can allege upon seeing how profitable it is for localities to throw people in jail.
> > Actually it’s not... did you read it?
Yes, but apparently you did not. Here's the quote:
> Xinjiang, in the far reaches of Western China bordering Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Muslim-majority countries, is facing a brutal crackdown by China’s government, which has placed more than a million Muslims in concentration camps or forced them to work in factories making everything from cotton to soft drinks to electronics.
Trying to spin this off as some sort of voluntary job thing is extremely disingenuous. Almost as disingenuous as trying to spin paid prison labor in the US as slave labor.
And it’s a debatable one.
You stated:
> The central allegation is that a few thousand Xinjiang Muslims were offered employment possibly in exchange for political indoctrination
It's a million, and they were not offered employment. They were "transferred" and forced to work in factories, among other places.
You argue every point, but what do you think should be done?
"Offered employment in exchange for political indoctrination"? What exactly does that mean?
Or are you attempting to redefine the word "slave"?
That's simply untrue.
External labor, the kind discussed here - contracted by a 3rd party for money - is voluntary.
It's illegal, of course, because it's literally slavery despite the window-dressing of money changing hands. But the slaves are vulnerable and don't necessarily know it's illegal, or they're threatened.
Majority of your examples state something along the lines of "paying inmates peanuts to make expensive things"... which literally is not the definition of slave labor.
The article is about literal Chinese Slave Labor camps. There is no comparison with any of the things in your list.
Most people would also agree, providing a purpose - jobs, training and skills to inmates is a net win for everyone involved, and is a core component in rehabilitation - directly combating rescindance.