Doing some research on the history of slavery led me to ponder the following question. I've given the question to my uni students here in Tokyo with assurances that I, for one, certainly do not know the right answer.
Can ending slavery be an after-the-fact justification for war and conquest?
The obvious first example that comes to the mind of most Americans would be the Union's conquest of the Confederacy. If ending slavery can be used to justify the Civil War, can it be used to justify the following invasions?
Japan outlawed slavery in Taiwan, Manchuria, and Korea (where, according to one source, it approached 30% of the population) after its conquest of those countries. After conquering Tibet, China ended slavery there. According to Chinese sources, well over 50% of the country were slaves.
Can the justification be made?
Did, in fact, slavery exist in Taiwan, China, and Tibet before outside invasions?
Any other similar situations come to mind, where a conqueror does "good" things like ending slavery?
Recent discussions in the History forum
AnnouncementAmazon Discussions Feedback Forum
|431||28 days ago|
|Who killed JFK on November 22nd, 1963? What are some of your answers and beliefs? VOLUME II||6492||7 seconds ago|
|What Makes Americans Different Than Other People?||158||4 minutes ago|
|American Xenophon:Alexander Doniphan's March.||53||11 minutes ago|
|Was Groening guilty?||584||32 minutes ago|
|History of the Palestinian Nation (Part IV)||2416||1 hour ago|
|A Place For Pro-Israel Posters III||7647||3 hours ago|
|Civil War Question||1674||4 hours ago|
|Herbert Hoover||16||4 hours ago|
|General Grant and the Battle at Shiloh||9||7 hours ago|
|Did the United States Win or Lose the "Vietnam War"?||2514||9 hours ago|
|FDR Was Stalin's Stooge||356||10 hours ago|