So the inability to withdraw is key?In brief, when one party is owned by the other party without consent and cannot do anything to get out of the situation.
Along with the total loss of freedom of action and choice.So the inability to withdraw is key?
His,or Her......I agree with what has been said. But a real slave has lost his soul to his owner.
I suppose I find "fake" slaves more interesting, then...I agree with what has been said. But a real slave has lost his soul to his owner.
I guess there are different forms in real live, in history as in role play.Inspired partly by the "define a whore" thread and partly by a discussion I had with someone on another site... what makes a particular unequal, exploitative relationship "slavery" as opposed to something else?
I would be more precise : it is slavery when one party is legally owned by another party without consent and cannot do anything legally to get out of the situation.In brief, when one party is owned by the other party without consent and cannot do anything to get out of the situation.
So human trafficking as practiced today doesn't count?I would be more precise : it is slavery when one party is legally owned by another party without consent and cannot do anything legally to get out of the situation.
No, since it is :So human trafficking as practiced today doesn't count?
Interesting. it does tend towards one of my own preferences, that the slavery be backed by societal power/recognition. No escaping and calling the cops on your kidnapper or anything.No, since it is :
a) illegal and a criminal activity, often facilitated because of corruption and lack of law enforcement.
b) the trafficked people take the initiative (either forced by local conflict, or being persuaded by the traffickers) to make the journey and even pay for it (closing a bad deal, generally)
Exactly! Under legal slavery, escaping is a crime and the cops are called to find and bring back the slave. It also implies different standards in penal law : those for the free population, and much harsher sanctions for slaves (e.g. for crimes commited by them to third parties - it could be a matter of debate, whether the owner has unlimited power over the life of a slave, or that law imposes maximum sanctions; also whether a death sentence of a slave may be carried out by the owner, or that the slave should be handed over to justice, even when the owner has (rightfully) spoken the death sentence).Interesting. it does tend towards one of my own preferences, that the slavery be backed by societal power/recognition. No escaping and calling the cops on your kidnapper or anything.
Indeed - though the law would probably reserve the right to eliminate the slave themselves even if owners were permitted to as well. Or the punishment for disposing of slaves illegally could be a mere slap on the wrist - or have real teeth. And then there's also the question if the "accidental" deaths of slaves are investigated very hard if their owner doesn't want it so...Exactly! Under legal slavery, escaping is a crime and the cops are called to find and bring back the slave. It also implies different standards in penal law : those for the free population, and much harsher sanctions for slaves (e.g. for crimes commited by them to third parties - it could be a matter of debate, whether the owner has unlimited power over the life of a slave, or that law imposes maximum sanctions; also whether a death sentence of a slave may be carried out by the owner, or that the slave should be handed over to justice, even when the owner has (rightfully) spoken the death sentence).
Indeed, that is an important point.Interesting. it does tend towards one of my own preferences, that the slavery be backed by societal power/recognition. No escaping and calling the cops on your kidnapper or anything.