No, it abolished slavery with an exception carved out for punishment for crime.
The difference is important. Saying it was “made a punishment” suggests that before the amendment that option didn’t exist. It did. The 13th amendment just clarified that that use was allowed to continue.
But, it’s also worth noting that in the late 1700s and early 1800s imprisonment was uncommon, and a lot of crimes just carried the death penalty. In England, pickpocketing more than the modern equivalent of about $40 could result in a death penalty. Same with cutting down trees, or stealing from a rabbit warren. For less serious crimes there were the stocks, whipping, and fines. England had an option that wasn’t available to the US: transportation. Australia was originally a penal colony, and the people sent there were forced to labour until their sentences were up.
Prisons (along with their work programs) were seen as a new, progressive idea that could potentially reform a prisoner, rather than just killing / punishing them.
atocci@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Sounds like Jonathan still has a chance to redeem himself then
ivanafterall@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Why do you assume Jonathan isn’t the reason the 13th amendment doesn’t abolish slavery?