Slavery and evil

[Captain Tagon]

It has already been said but I just want to re-iterate that a lot of historical slavery isn't what many today would consider 'evil'. A lot of it historically was closer to the British serf system, or set ups where chosen sons of poor farmers would be brought into a wealthy household to do work but would also receive numerous benefits from the relationship. Going by that, slavery is in and of itself neutral in my opinion. The situation can sway it one way or another, but the concept itself isn't good or evil.

 

[reanjr]

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

Since slavery would fall under oppression, in D&D it is most certainly an evil act.

In my personal opinion, slavery in and of itself does not dip too far into evil. A person who is good in all other aspects of life, but has slaves, I do not think would become evil for doing so. In the medieval world, serfs were pretty much slaves. That would make any one of power in a feudal society evil, if that were the case.

On the other hand, slavery tends to create greater evil in other forms, especially looking at American slavery.

 

[reanjr]

There was no moral rationale or matter of domestic security that justified it; bigotry and greed are the roots of the practice, and Africans were simply convenient victims because they could not blend in like Europeans or run away as successfully as Native Americans.

Actually bigotry came after slavery. There were white slaves who worked alongside their black counterparts for many years. When slave revolts became too common, the laws were changed to give the white slaves more rights and possible freedom. They were also segregated from the black slaves to cut down on the alarming (to the slave owners) number of mulatto children being born among the slaves. Racism against blacks had nothing to with slavery. Blacks were the primary slaves because they were bought from black slave owners in Africa.

On the other hand, the American slave owners were the ones to manufacture the modern racism felt against blacks in America. It was simply a convenient measure to keep slaves in line and not band together in large numbers.

Native Americans, by the way, were found to be too unruly as slaves and so were rarely used. Genocide was a more attractive alternative to slavery when it came to them.

 

[Jdvn1]

Might a druid consider using horses or mules and such slavery?

 

[reanjr]

Might a druid consider using horses or mules and such slavery?

I'd say they would. Though horses traditionally are better treated than their human counterparts...

 

[Jdvn1]

Well, then a druid might consider a lot of people evil. That kind of takes away from the 'absolute' nature of alignment in D&D.

 

[Jdvn1]

Then again, a Druid who goes around freeing oppressed animals woudl just be hilarious.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

So where do you draw the line? Enslaving a person is evil, but an animal isn't? Why? Because the animal is not intelligent? Is it then ok to enslave idiots? What about a culture like the Aiel from the Wheel of Time? They were made slaves, but would not flee from it, as a matter of honor, even though they could walk out at will.

I'm not comparing hitching a horse to a cart to slavery, btw, just some ideas that popped into my head. I abhor slavery in any form, it's about the worst thing you can do to a person, imo.

 

[Jdvn1]

I think slavery needlessly complicates D&D. I'd personally specify 'slavery of humanoids' although that seemes prejudiced. As long as I was the GM and not the PC, I'd keep morality subjective.

 

[Sejs]

Slavery isn't in and of itself evil.


However, the capacity to do evil, particularly in the context of slavery (master/slave relations, slave acquisition, etc) is great. It's one of those hazy areas, like negative energy, where the subject itself isn't inherrantly evil, but evil can be done -with- it.


Slavery can mean 30 guys sleeping in a bare room, barely fed enough to stay alive, worked nearly into the grave, and horsewhipped at the slightest prompting. Rampant dehumanizing abuse, and easily identifiable as evil.

Slavery can also mean having legally protected status - noone messing with you because if they do, they're not just messing with one guy, they're messing with the king/church/etc - benefiting from an education far above that recieved by the common man, having an important and assured position in the upper eschelons of society, and a quality of living well above the norm. Being a valued member of society, provided for and respected. Is this evil?


In some societies, slaves were treated as worth less than farm animals, and the majority of their owners tried to claim some kind of inherrant superiority over their slaves. We're better than they are, they're meant to be slaves, and it's our right to own them... uh... just because.

Other societies treated slaves with care and difference because a slave was A) a highly useful, versatile, adaptable commodity, and B) expensive as all hell. Mistreating them would be like buying $250,000 car after $250,000 car and just driving them off a cliff, one by one. Or buying a super computer and then gutting it and using it as a fish tank.

Ultimatly it's no more inherrantly evil than any of a number of things. Like swords. Or taxes. Or magic. Or fire. It's all in how you use it.