This is an essay.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

What if slavery were legal today -- how would we cover it? A thought experiment[edit]

Industrial scale slavery, the complete and unconditional cradle to grave bondage of some human beings, by other human beings, has been legal, normal, so routine it was accepted without thinking. It was legal in ancient Rome, Greece, and other parts of the classical world. More recently it was legal in the USA, Brazil (almost up until 1900), and all of the European colonies in the Caribean, and Central and South America.

Imagine living as an abolitionist in the old South...[edit]

I think almost all of us, if we imagine how we would conduct ourselves if we lived in the antebullum South, would imagine ourselves as abolitionists, or at least closet abolitionists.

Bear in mind, views on slavery were very strongly held, and abolitionism was a minority view.

Now suppose we lived in the antebellum South, and were active wikipedia contributors. How would we cope with writing about topics related to slavery, while still complying with our obligations to write from the neutral point of view. If we tried to include references to third party sources that advanced abolitionist views, or advanced opinions that all ethnic groups were just as human, as capable of intellectual and artistic greatness as any other ethnic groups, I suggest we would have other contributors from the pro-slavery majority watching us very closely, and claiming that our use of non-mainstream (pro-slavery) sources was a lapse from WP:UNDUE.

Now imagine trying to cover topics related to slavery, today, if slavery had never been abolished...[edit]

For the purpose of this thought experiment please imagine that slavery not only had never been abolished, but was a big component of our economy, a component which reaped large dividends for investors.

I suggest that if slavery were being practiced today those in charge, like the tobacco industry, would have hired the smartest, sneakiest, spin doctors money could buy. Those spin doctors would challenge abolitionists at every turn. If abolitionists tried to describe slavery as a brutal industry, they would bristle with outrage. They would say, "how dare those abolitionists ignore the great reforms we have made, in the last 160 years. Yes, there was a day when some bad apples were unnecessarily brutal. But with modern overseer training, no one is licensed to carry a whip, or a cudgel, without being trained in how to administer corporal discipline for any occasion.

The spin doctors would have worked to prevent abolitionists calling the victims slaves, They would have come up with a euphemism like "receipients of guaranteed lifetime employment" -- only cleverer.

So, could an abolitionist use the wikipedia to advocate for reform or abolition of slavery?[edit]

No. I gave this a lot of thought, way back in 2005. I think any contributor who has a strongly held position, whether it is a minority opinion,

We have an essay WP:Tendentious editing, that has a section entitled WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.