Slavery and Socialism

     Slavery is the institutional ownership of other human beings as if they are mere property. Slaves are considered necessary and valuable for the prosperity of the owners. They were treated as animals. For instance, how would farmers treat their finest horses, as each master purchased the finest slaves? Responsible masters would nourish and value their slaves. Irresponsible masters would treat their slaves just as they would stubborn mules. That statement seems to put the onus of how they are treated on the slaves. Considering though, that they are not beasts, and they are not indentured, but imprisoned, slaves can be expected to rebel given the opportunity. Rebellion was treated with harsh judgment and punishment.
     Slavery is inhumane, but humans institutionalized it. Those with more power did not like the idea that "cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 
thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. ¹⁹ By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground" (Gen 17b-19). Those who considered themselves more "fit" enslaved others to avoid hard work. They preferred to manage enslaved people rather than manage a cursed ground!
     The fittest were those who won the battles. Oftentimes the less fit of men won the battles because their numbers were greater. That makes sense since God commanded that man and woman multiply:

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Gen 1:28).

     That command was before the  first two humans were cursed. God did not change His dictates; men merely misconstrued the command. They multiplied, however, they took God's command to have dominion, not only over the beasts, but the weaker ones of their own species. Charles Darwin, in his book, On the Origin of the Species, considered numbers within the species as the fittest. There, indeed, is power in numbers. However, because other kinds multiply more proliferently, after the fall of mankind to sin, cunningness increased the power of the human species. (Gen 3:1). The more "crafty" of men have dominion over the less crafty. Numbers are still vastly important because even virus's can subdue mankind!
     Slavery, then, is an outcome of sin, just as poverty, sickness, and death. Jesus could have ended poverty and slavery with one thought, but he chose not to. (Mat 26:11). Jesus did not come to save men from toil or slavery, but to save them from eternal death. For him, the "fittest" are the most righteous - those freed, not from other men, but from sin. Slaves shed blood and water for their masters, but Jesus shed his own blood and water for his servants (John 19:34). Thus, Jesus served all mankind with his all, and became the slave to all mankind. There is no dishonor in serving others, but there is in mistreating servants.
     Karl Marx provided the root cause to defend socialism. He defined cruel masters as the bourgeoise, and the servants as proletariats. Socialism is blamed on the master/slave existence - the weaker class making the fitter class wealthier. Indeed, crony capitalism is not just. That type of capitalism is when the higher social classes and powerful officials combine to take advantage of the less elite and less powerful for gain. Marx was partially correct, albeit capitalism in general is not through that nexus. Capitalism is the best ideology if it is administered justly and fairly. Not to provide all the examples, but it is not socialism which scripture espouses, but just capitalism.
     Slavery was extant in the United States when Marx and Engels wrote their manifesto. They compared the proletariat to slaves and the bourgeoise to slave owners. They perceived slavery to be a capitalistic endeavor. However, on closer comparison, American slavery was an early version of Marxist socialism which led to Marxist communism. Socialism is based on voluntary submission to the authority of the state. In the case of slavery, the plantation owner was the "state" and his power was derived from the government. The slave master may have not been the fittest, but the government empowered him to have dominion over the "beasts" from Africa.
     Slavery, just as socialism, is based on survival of the fittest. Darwin cannot be blamed for that, but Marx can be. He established a system where the perceived "fittest" survived the most luxuriously with the less "fit" surviving but with crumbs. Slaves could do extra work and be freed. Kind masters even emancipated their slaves. On the other hand, socialists by decree cannot rise from serfdom. Socialism keeps obedient people enslaved by offering no path to prosperity as socialism deems prosperity evil (at least for the masses).
      Many slaves do not prefer their subservience. Many appreciated that they were nourished and provided for from the cradle to the grave. The system of slave and master is identical to socialism. Slave owners were about to realize that slavery was getting costly. Their capitalistic system could not support the provision of those over whom they had dominion. With socialism, when capitalism is destroyed, there is no way to finance their economy. Slaves were becoming parasitical to slave holders and many theorists believe that slavery in America would have died a natural death because it is a destructive economy. Socialism all over the world, has time and time again, died a slow death because it is expensive!
     Cruelty to slaves resulted from the attitudes of slaves. As long as they did not mind being a just a little nourished, most had some semblance of contentment even as their families were destroyed. Not only do socialists want to end the role of master over slave, but "sell" the "slaves" to the government, eliminating the middleman for awhile.
     When slaves had cruel masters, they rebelled. The transition from socialism to communism is when the "slaves" refuse to voluntarily remain part of the "herd." Then the insolent master, now the government, uses force and even murder to keep the "slaves" on the plantation. Thus, the slaves only perceive that they are free, but all the while are still indentured to the masters.
     What happens to the old masters? They merely support the government master. They take the money raised from capitalism to support the socialist/communist rulers. Why do billionaires as George Soros and Mark Zuckerburg support "progressives?" To maintain the regressive plantation owner slavery institutions. Some of you liberals may not understand; you are the servants, socialists are the masters. Just try bucking that relationship as Candace Owens just did, and watch the masters turn on their "slaves." That's right; blacks remain slaves to their Democrat masters and are content with the crumbs which they get after Democrat politicians reap the harvest!
     Modern-day black people who vote Democrat are mostly "Uncle Toms" as they are satisfied living on the socialist Democrat plantations. They may be right that they have not gone far, because they have not. Candace saw through their cunning; Democrats, still thinking they are the most fit, supremely rule over those they see as less fit, and are really fending for themselves.
     Democrats enlarge their "plantations" with naïve voters indentured from Mexico and Central America. Neither do they realize that they too will remain serfs to Democrats, doing their bidding, for the appearance of gain. Sure, they will live better than in their chaotic systems but most will do the menial work which rich socialistic-minded white kids are too good to do! The world has returned to the wilderness outside the Garden where some men are enslaved to reduce the sweating of those who perceive themselves more fit. Satan smiles as God weeps because socialism denies God and his doctrine of dependence on Him.
     What about the separation of families under socialism? Does that happen? The elimination of marriage and the disbanding of families are from the Communist Manifesto. They only say they want to destroy the plantation, but socialists want to own the plantation, and they have no problem with separating marriage partners or their children for their prerogatives. They are just a little more humane in how they do the parting of family members; they indoctrinate children and parents to desire separation.
     Too many slaves to support the Democrat "plantation?" That's easy; just destroy them in the womb. Too few slaves? That's easy as well; just import them by the hundreds! They'll come in; did not the Jews go to their demise naively?
     Socialism is godless, or rather, their leaders become the "gods." Open your eyes and look at all the rich Democrats who have gotten their gain on the backs of their socialistic-minded servants. They have much because you are content with less. You struggle for $15.00/hr. as they smile with $100,000,000 a year. Just who are the masters and who are the slaves? Like Eve, y'all have been fooled by the Democrats snakes.