Those social costs were not an INTEGRAL part of the economic life in the North but unintended consequences. Slavery, ON THE OTHER HAND, was BASED upon the use of the whip and the lash. It could not exist without them because they were vital instruments in taking away human freedom.
So it's like the difference between the "basic model" and the "optional package", eh? Well, it's nice to know how needless the abuses really were, then.
The truth is that corporal punishment was commonplace in the nineteenth century workplace. Foremen very often threatened workers with truncheons and sailors were VERY often flogged. The average, nominally free sailor had seen many more whippings than had the average slave.
Must’nt think about the Cherokee now should you?
General Watie's people?
How does their treatment by the prewar United States compare to the treatment of other tribes by the postwar United States? How did the Sioux make out? How do you feel about Chivington's, Sherman's, and Sheridan's answer to "the Indian problem"? How did you expect this to help your argument?
1) In spite of all the polls of sailors I am sure were undertaken your rhetoric is unproven and silly. But it is typical of those trying to change the subject and deflect attention from the actions of the Land of the Whip and the Late;
2) My “argument” has nothing to do with the Indians that was a red herring you decided to throw into the melee as a distraction from discussion of the realities of the Land of the Whip and the Lash.