> Personally, I am not an "ends justify the means" kind of guy
I'm a "means produce the ends" kind of guy.
For example, I'm pretty sure that a system which uses coercive means will have coercive ends. FWIW, many people disagree with that specific example - they insist that their system that uses coercion will not end up being coercive.
Do you have an example where something that depended on slavery as a means ended up good? (It's easy to find things that depended on slavery that produced what someone wanted.)
Yes, there are examples of societies that had slavery and became "good" (for some reasonable definition of "good"), but I'd argue that their "good end" was not dependent upon their slavery means.
I'd say that those owning slaves did so because it enhanced their quality of life -- therefore it was good for them. So pretty much any society that had slavery the ends were good for those in control, for some measure of good (they may have had a higher standard of living but they lost their humanity etc)
I'm a "means produce the ends" kind of guy.
For example, I'm pretty sure that a system which uses coercive means will have coercive ends. FWIW, many people disagree with that specific example - they insist that their system that uses coercion will not end up being coercive.