“I owe my soul to the company store”.
Still haven’t convinced me.
“The 1890 census revealed that more than one million children, ten to fifteen years old, worked in America. [5] That number increased to two million by 1910. Industries employed children as young as five or six to work as many as eighteen to twenty hours a day.
Breaker Boys, Pennsylvania
Physical ailments were common. Glassworks employees were exposed to intense heat and heavy fumes. Young miners sat on boards in cramped positions, breathing heavy dust, sifting through coal. Seafood workers stood for hours shucking oysters at five cents a pail. The sharp oyster shells sometimes cut their hands.
Industrialization did not create child labor, but it did contribute to the need for child labor reform. The replacement of skilled artisans by machinery and the growth of factories and mills made child labor increasingly profitable for businesses. [6] Many employers preferred hiring children because they were quick, easy to train, and were willing to work for lower wages. “
Are you stating that these children weren’t in forced servitude.
Couldn’t read or write, to young to make an informed decision about anything and beaten on the job.
Still a distinction without a difference.
Whereas slavery was ended in 1865 , Child labor continued well into the 20th century.
As a matter of fact, my grandparents grew up in PA during that time period. Again, there's no doubt that conditions were harsh for children back then. Stating that child labor doesn't equate with slavery doesn't mean that I think child labor was a good thing.
Are you stating that these children weren’t in forced servitude.
Not in servitude to the factories, mills, or mines IF they were sent to work there by their parents/families.
I'm stating that these children suffered under harsh conditions. Perhaps the conditions under which they suffered were even worse in many cases than what some slaves may have endured. But, harsh conditions doesn't equal slavery.
Again, there are cases of child enslavement: for example, orphans forced into work by an orphanage. But, the most one could argue is that child laborers like my grandfather were in servitude to their families who sent them into these factories, mills, and mines to work.
Couldn’t read or write, to young to make an informed decision about anything and beaten on the job.
Children were beaten everywhere in those days, including at home and in school. Life was BRUTAL for children back then. When I said my grandfather grabbed the whip snapped at him, that didn't mean he was beaten on the job. When all the boys would run inside after a break (according to what I was told), the owner would stand there with a whip and snap it at the last boy in. That one day, my grandfather was the last boy in. He was afraid to go home and tell his parents he'd lost his job. People had a different mindset than we do today. Our society didn't become child-centered until later.
I'm sure you don't want the whole family history. ;-) But, those days were not friendly to children, anywhere. My grandmother worked as a seamstress as a young girl, and her mother would tie her in the basement, beat her, and leave her there. She had scars on her back all her life from those beatings. Home was not a nice, warm place for many children back then. And school... None of my grandparents wanted to go to school back then. Children were beaten there, too. None of my grandparents went to school past age nine or maybe 11, maximum.
Equating harsh conditions with forced labor is what Marxists do. The Left equates the employment of people in the "Third World" with slavery. There is real slavery all over the world today. But, if we equate slavery with harsh conditions, what happens when society either tightens or loosens the definition of what is "harsh"?
Btw, I searched for an Ayn Rand comment on child labor, but I found nothing.