Oh I see a few parallels. The cost factor and general acceptance.
People who railed against slavery still bought products that were brought to market with slave labor. Those who buy food today give little to no thought on the labor that picked the produce or dug the tater fields. As a kid growing up, I saw many migrant workers who were employed at the tater fields and the sorting shed in Foley and Elberta, just up the road. They left town at the end of harvest to go further South to pick the citrus crops. Their stake body truck beds were crowded with people. Like Gypsies. No one gave them another thought after they left.
Slavery was a tad more expensive I'd think but the migrant workers who have traveled the crop harvest across the country live in worse conditions than slaves did in most cases. They have the camps and there's been a number of books written on those camps that show they are no more than slave pens. Patrick D. Smith wrote a book (that was made into a movie with Ralph Waite) called Angel City. Probably more accurate than we'd like to believe. There seems to be a dirty underworld connected to the migrant circle. Those who hire them even if they are illegal pay less out in wages. Yet there are those who still believe it would be wrong to not let these illegals work. I do not understand how they can ignore the word 'illegal' but they do. It's cheaper to hire them because no one complains about the low wage. It as upside down as a situation can be but people still defend the illegal immigrant or domestic situation who abhor the word 'slave'.

Pam