Churches and Slavery

[Veknironth]

Well, I started an online game and in the first session I wanted to throw the players a moral concern. They were in a town that had a lot of slaves freed. The owner of the business whose slaves ran to freedom offered to pay them for each slave they returned. To my surprise, several of them jumped at it. Understandable, from an in character perspective since in the Timiro Kingdom has rampant slavery. But one character is a Witch Hunter and he asked if the Church of Light and Dark was pro or anti slavery. I couldn't find any conclusive answer, but I guess they at least tolerate it.

What do you all think? Are there any churches that are more or less in favor of slavery?

-Vek
"Personally, I am anti-slavery. For the record."

[Library Ogre]

Generally, I would say it comes down to alignment. The Light part likely opposes it; the Dark side does not. The combined church probably has a wishy-washy statement that doesn't take any stands.

[kiralon]

In the game I don't think the church of light in Timiro or the western empire has an issue with slaves (That's even a lot of of the good guys), as the slaves are mostly non-human and seem to be thought of as animals anyway, so it's not slavery because they aren't people, its just getting the animals back into their pens.
The eastern territories and GNW seem to have different ideas about personal liberty and a bit more race inclusive, so the church's would be more likely concerned with it in those places, and i actually think its banned by the wolfen.

[Axelmania]

slaves are mostly non-human and seem to be thought of as animals anyway, so it's not slavery because they aren't people, its just getting the animals back into their pens

Yeah that's pretty much how it works with Doc Feral being Scrupulous and being able to keep enslaved sentient animals in TMNT.

All it takes is "twisted perceptions".

IE if the mandate of good alignments is "always help people" you either don't actually perceive some things as people or else you do but you view slavery as helping them because they're better off under your care.

[ShadowHawk]

In a few cases, the indentured servants were better off. Because it presented a way for people to get out of situations in their home countries where they could not find work or simply wanted to escape to make a better life than they had.

[Axelmania]

In a few cases, the indentured servants were better off. Because it presented a way for people to get out of situations in their home countries where they could not find work or simply wanted to escape to make a better life than they had.

for a "good slave master" the Shield Hero anime comes to mind as an interesting example

[Warshield73]

In a few cases, the indentured servants were better off. Because it presented a way for people to get out of situations in their home countries where they could not find work or simply wanted to escape to make a better life than they had.

If you are talking real world history you have to be careful.

The average indentured servant in North America had shorter life expectancies (at some points in the 1600's this was shorter by decades), higher infant mortality, and a nearly double maternal death rate. Granted the numbers in Virginia skew this down a bit but even taken individually the only state with good numbers for indentures is Massachusetts.

Now the descendants (grand children and great grand children) were far healthier, had long life expectancy, and were even 2 to 4 inches taller but the indentures themselves rarely had it better than in England. Also keep in mind that the conditions in England, and to a lesser extent in mainland Europe, were largely manufactured to get large numbers of people to move to the colonies for political reasons.

As for the alignment I think you could say that good alignment could work in slavery if they don't see them as people, but it would be hard to maintain that good alignment over time as slavery requires brutality and power does corrupt.

[ShadowHawk]

In a few cases, the indentured servants were better off. Because it presented a way for people to get out of situations in their home countries where they could not find work or simply wanted to escape to make a better life than they had.

If you are talking real world history you have to be careful.

The average indentured servant in North America had shorter life expectancies (at some points in the 1600's this was shorter by decades), higher infant mortality, and a nearly double maternal death rate. Granted the numbers in Virginia skew this down a bit but even taken individually the only state with good numbers for indentures is Massachusetts.

Now the descendants (grand children and great grand children) were far healthier, had long life expectancy, and were even 2 to 4 inches taller but the indentures themselves rarely had it better than in England. Also keep in mind that the conditions in England, and to a lesser extent in mainland Europe, were largely manufactured to get large numbers of people to move to the colonies for political reasons.

As for the alignment I think you could say that good alignment could work in slavery if they don't see them as people, but it would be hard to maintain that good alignment over time as slavery requires brutality and power does corrupt.

I am not talking English persay, but about Irish, Scottish, Swedish, and Dutch. My family and Shannon's family have a similar back ground. The family that bought our great, great, great, great, (etc?????) grandfathers' families debt as a 16 and I think 17 y/o had daughters and no sons and aloud them to merry one, and gave them some land when they passed. In my case, the tulip market crash was the cause so, yeah; mine was Dutch and joined a Dutch merchant fleet under the same captain that brought him here after his debt was settled and when his second kid was born and he made it to be the captain of a ship.

[Warshield73]

In a few cases, the indentured servants were better off. Because it presented a way for people to get out of situations in their home countries where they could not find work or simply wanted to escape to make a better life than they had.

If you are talking real world history you have to be careful.

The average indentured servant in North America had shorter life expectancies (at some points in the 1600's this was shorter by decades), higher infant mortality, and a nearly double maternal death rate. Granted the numbers in Virginia skew this down a bit but even taken individually the only state with good numbers for indentures is Massachusetts.

Now the descendants (grand children and great grand children) were far healthier, had long life expectancy, and were even 2 to 4 inches taller but the indentures themselves rarely had it better than in England. Also keep in mind that the conditions in England, and to a lesser extent in mainland Europe, were largely manufactured to get large numbers of people to move to the colonies for political reasons.

As for the alignment I think you could say that good alignment could work in slavery if they don't see them as people, but it would be hard to maintain that good alignment over time as slavery requires brutality and power does corrupt.

I am not talking English persay, but about Irish, Scottish, Swedish, and Dutch. My family and Shannon's family have a similar back ground. The family that bought our great, great, great, great, (etc?????) grandfathers' families debt as a 16 and I think 17 y/o had daughters and no sons and aloud them to merry one, and gave them some land when they passed. In my case, the tulip market crash was the cause so, yeah; mine was Dutch and joined a Dutch merchant fleet under the same captain that brought him here after his debt was settled and when his second kid was born and he made it to be the captain of a ship.

Not discounting your personal story, I was specific about just being "careful" and what the "average" was. As somebody who spent a lot of time over the last thirty years studying early American history professional your families experience is definitely in a minority. Most indentures faced abuse, family separation and many were not given the land, tools or other items they were promised when there indenture was completed.

Anecdotes make great stories, my anecdotes included, but we have to be careful of generalizing.

[ShadowHawk]

In a few cases, the indentured servants were better off. Because it presented a way for people to get out of situations in their home countries where they could not find work or simply wanted to escape to make a better life than they had.

If you are talking real world history you have to be careful.

The average indentured servant in North America had shorter life expectancies (at some points in the 1600's this was shorter by decades), higher infant mortality, and a nearly double maternal death rate. Granted the numbers in Virginia skew this down a bit but even taken individually the only state with good numbers for indentures is Massachusetts.

Now the descendants (grand children and great grand children) were far healthier, had long life expectancy, and were even 2 to 4 inches taller but the indentures themselves rarely had it better than in England. Also keep in mind that the conditions in England, and to a lesser extent in mainland Europe, were largely manufactured to get large numbers of people to move to the colonies for political reasons.

As for the alignment I think you could say that good alignment could work in slavery if they don't see them as people, but it would be hard to maintain that good alignment over time as slavery requires brutality and power does corrupt.

I am not talking English persay, but about Irish, Scottish, Swedish, and Dutch. My family and Shannon's family have a similar back ground. The family that bought our great, great, great, great, (etc?????) grandfathers' families debt as a 16 and I think 17 y/o had daughters and no sons and aloud them to merry one, and gave them some land when they passed. In my case, the tulip market crash was the cause so, yeah; mine was Dutch and joined a Dutch merchant fleet under the same captain that brought him here after his debt was settled and when his second kid was born and he made it to be the captain of a ship.

Not discounting your personal story, I was specific about just being "careful" and what the "average" was. As somebody who spent a lot of time over the last thirty years studying early American history professional your families experience is definitely in a minority. Most indentures faced abuse, family separation and many were not given the land, tools or other items they were promised when there indenture was completed.

Anecdotes make great stories, my anecdotes included, but we have to be careful of generalizing.

True. And I can't dispute it. Our families did indeed luck up. But my grandfather was the youngest of the 4 boys, a very hard worker, from my understanding he helped out on the ship when the captain lost a man on the way over here and got the job based upon that. A very influential family back then, but still.

There is also those families that only got a portion or never got the pay from the sale, or the banks who refused to credit the debit as being paid. And also the practices of the patroons especially by the 3rd generation were usually very bad.

[Zer0 Kay]

Generally, I would say it comes down to alignment. The Light part likely opposes it; the Dark side does not. The combined church probably has a wishy-washy statement that doesn't take any stands.

But why are you comparing A Fantasy world to the modern world? Does that mean that Sumeria, Babylon, Egypt, Persia, China... every freaking empire prior to midway through the last millennia still practiced slavery in some form and are therefore evil? So does that mean that India, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, North Korea and Cambodia are evil?

58 percent of people in slavery are living in just five countries: India, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Uzbekistan. The report estimates that North Korea has the world's highest prevalence of slavery at 4.4 percent of its population, followed by Uzbekistan (4.0 percent) and Cambodia (1.6 percent).

If they're evil then other countries can claim to be better than them.

Translating it for a more medieval sensibility the gods probably think of all mortals as their property and it is just in how they treat them that is determined by alignment. To a Principled god they likely see their mortals as family and tend to treat them well while Diabolic treat their mortals as nothing more than convenient tools where it matters not if they live, die, are used as food or breed. The Church of Light would likely encourage that slaves are treated well while the Church of Dark would care less what you do with your slave. Likewise Light would actually be watching while the Dark are only looking for ways to further their own desires. Playing in character in period a Paladin of the light should worry about the health and welfare of a land owners slaves but wouldn't try to free them if they are being cared for while a Priest of Darkness would likely have multiple slaves just for sacrifice and would be troubled much if he had to swap out his kitchen staff for some extra blood on the altar.

[kiralon]

But why are you comparing A Fantasy world to the modern world? Does that mean that Sumeria, Babylon, Egypt, Persia, China... every freaking empire prior to midway through the last millennia still practiced slavery in some form and are therefore evil? So does that mean that India, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, North Korea and Cambodia are evil?

To my moral alignment yeah I would say that yes, if they allow slavery I think the world would be better off without them,
But
I also don't think that my morals should be forced on anyone either, and I don't understand the situations there well enough to say that getting rid of it would help or hinder, but i think it would be worth a try as there are lots of places around the world that do get by without slavery.


“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke”

[Kraynic]

Ended up posting in the wrong thread...

[Library Ogre]

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

[Zer0 Kay]

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

Your still assigning modern western values even to the alignment system. A feudal knight would see what we consider many of the evils of slavery as part of the feudal system. Meaning as a standard serf you are not permitted to be educated, you are not permitted to move freely through or out of the kingdom, you have no right to air grievances. These are the baseline these are common these to a night are neither good nor evil. Going against what your lord says is evil. Furthering your lords will is good. A Principled feudal knight would only see slavery as wrong if the slaves are treated poorly, otherwise slave and master in feudal society is barely more than x serf's service has been bestowed on y serf by right of slavery, debt slavery or whatever the practice is called instead of oweing fealty to the king. Slavery in feudal times by feudal people is only evil when innocents are harmed and harm doesnt include psychological damage or poor self esteem or any stuff westerners would deem as harm now says. Caining as punishment as prescribed in a kingdoms laws that would not maim or kill a person is not harm.

In short all slavery would do to a feudal serf is change his ownership from the king to another person. Being owned by someone wouldnt be considered harm therefore it doesnt require help. If a master relentlessly beats a slave bringing him near death that would still be considered harm.

[Zer0 Kay]

Just to be straight. I believe slavery is the lowest practice mankind has came up with and that is even compared to ritual sacrifice. Because one only ends a life the other takes ones freedoms. I could care less how either makes a person feel. To me it is all about a persons loss of self autonomy. Because I am a modern westerner I see that as harm and restoring that as helping. A feudal knight wouldnt see that as harm. A feudal serf wouldnt see it as harm as neither know of it. I hate that so many Americans can tolerate people who are alright with dealing with other people who still practice slavery. As many times modern slavery takes people who are self autonomous and used to their freedoms and strip it from them. As for some people's comments on animals I find it funny that it was Science that made modern slavery acceptable to the confederacy and some people now due to Darwins theories on evolution. Whaaaaat science isn't always right?! OMG can't believe the Yankees (I am one, I'm being sarcastic) are arguing against settled science.

[Warshield73]

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

Your still assigning modern western values even to the alignment system. A feudal knight would see what we consider many of the evils of slavery as part of the feudal system. Meaning as a standard serf you are not permitted to be educated, you are not permitted to move freely through or out of the kingdom, you have no right to air grievances. These are the baseline these are common these to a night are neither good nor evil. Going against what your lord says is evil. Furthering your lords will is good. A Principled feudal knight would only see slavery as wrong if the slaves are treated poorly, otherwise slave and master in feudal society is barely more than x serf's service has been bestowed on y serf by right of slavery, debt slavery or whatever the practice is called instead of oweing fealty to the king. Slavery in feudal times by feudal people is only evil when innocents are harmed and harm doesnt include psychological damage or poor self esteem or any stuff westerners would deem as harm now says. Caining as punishment as prescribed in a kingdoms laws that would not maim or kill a person is not harm.

In short all slavery would do to a feudal serf is change his ownership from the king to another person. Being owned by someone wouldnt be considered harm therefore it doesnt require help. If a master relentlessly beats a slave bringing him near death that would still be considered harm.

I'm going to ignore the rest of this because it is way off topic and would be better for the sound off forum or something.

We are talking about a gaming system alignment system which is designed to allow modern players understand the characters. It is black and white and the do's and don'ts are listed.

Just to be straight. I believe slavery is the lowest practice mankind has came up with and that is even compared to ritual sacrifice. Because one only ends a life the other takes ones freedoms. I could care less how either makes a person feel. To me it is all about a persons loss of self autonomy. Because I am a modern westerner I see that as harm and restoring that as helping. A feudal knight wouldnt see that as harm. A feudal serf wouldnt see it as harm as neither know of it. I hate that so many Americans can tolerate people who are alright with dealing with other people who still practice slavery. As many times modern slavery takes people who are self autonomous and used to their freedoms and strip it from them. As for some people's comments on animals I find it funny that it was Science that made modern slavery acceptable to the confederacy and some people now due to Darwins theories on evolution. Whaaaaat science isn't always right?! OMG can't believe the Yankees (I am one, I'm being sarcastic) are arguing against settled science.

I'm going to be honest this part is too grotesque to be here. Truthfully this just feels like trolling so I'm going to leave it at that and ask you to take it to the sound off.

The alignment system is clear, it is set to a modern standard, deal with it.

[Library Ogre]

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

Your still assigning modern western values even to the alignment system.

...

In short all slavery would do to a feudal serf is change his ownership from the king to another person. Being owned by someone wouldnt be considered harm therefore it doesnt require help. If a master relentlessly beats a slave bringing him near death that would still be considered harm.

You are ignoring that an essential aspect of good, as laid out in the alignment system, is freedom. Slavery (and serfdom) are both incompatible with freedom and, therefore, at best, selfish. Can you remain good if you diverge strongly from a good alignment on a single question? Can you remain good if you accept as proper those things that are divorced from the definition of good? That is a question for a GM to decide.

You want to invent the values of fictional people in a fictional world, and say we should be examining them through that lens, but there's zero indication that we should view alignment, a descriptive measure of a person's actions, through anything but a modern lens. The only way you reach "Well, slavery might be good sometimes" is if you don't view slaves as people deserving, as the book says, "life and freedom".

[Zer0 Kay]

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

Your still assigning modern western values even to the alignment system. A feudal knight would see what we consider many of the evils of slavery as part of the feudal system. Meaning as a standard serf you are not permitted to be educated, you are not permitted to move freely through or out of the kingdom, you have no right to air grievances. These are the baseline these are common these to a night are neither good nor evil. Going against what your lord says is evil. Furthering your lords will is good. A Principled feudal knight would only see slavery as wrong if the slaves are treated poorly, otherwise slave and master in feudal society is barely more than x serf's service has been bestowed on y serf by right of slavery, debt slavery or whatever the practice is called instead of oweing fealty to the king. Slavery in feudal times by feudal people is only evil when innocents are harmed and harm doesnt include psychological damage or poor self esteem or any stuff westerners would deem as harm now says. Caining as punishment as prescribed in a kingdoms laws that would not maim or kill a person is not harm.

In short all slavery would do to a feudal serf is change his ownership from the king to another person. Being owned by someone wouldnt be considered harm therefore it doesnt require help. If a master relentlessly beats a slave bringing him near death that would still be considered harm.

I'm going to ignore the rest of this because it is way off topic and would be better for the sound off forum or something.

We are talking about a gaming system alignment system which is designed to allow modern players understand the characters. It is black and white and the do's and don'ts are listed.

Just to be straight. I believe slavery is the lowest practice mankind has came up with and that is even compared to ritual sacrifice. Because one only ends a life the other takes ones freedoms. I could care less how either makes a person feel. To me it is all about a persons loss of self autonomy. Because I am a modern westerner I see that as harm and restoring that as helping. A feudal knight wouldnt see that as harm. A feudal serf wouldnt see it as harm as neither know of it. I hate that so many Americans can tolerate people who are alright with dealing with other people who still practice slavery. As many times modern slavery takes people who are self autonomous and used to their freedoms and strip it from them. As for some people's comments on animals I find it funny that it was Science that made modern slavery acceptable to the confederacy and some people now due to Darwins theories on evolution. Whaaaaat science isn't always right?! OMG can't believe the Yankees (I am one, I'm being sarcastic) are arguing against settled science.

I'm going to be honest this part is too grotesque to be here. Truthfully this just feels like trolling so I'm going to leave it at that and ask you to take it to the sound off.

The alignment system is clear, it is set to a modern standard, deal with it.

Ask all you want. You are not OP nor moderator. The alignment system isnt set to modern western sensibilities. It is set to a bunch of generalizations so as not to offend people. While we westerners can say Principled are are against slavery because... People in those countries listed above can just as easily see help others in need and not allow harm to come to innocents and believe it doesn't apply to slavery. Medieval feudal game should use medieval feudal mindset otherwise a knight and palladin or samurai have no place as a Lord is nothing more than a land Lord and you just need to quit if he orders you to do something distasteful or at least give your two weeks notice since it is just a job. Maybe he will give you a reference to the next Lord.

[Zer0 Kay]

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

Your still assigning modern western values even to the alignment system.

...

In short all slavery would do to a feudal serf is change his ownership from the king to another person. Being owned by someone wouldnt be considered harm therefore it doesnt require help. If a master relentlessly beats a slave bringing him near death that would still be considered harm.

You are ignoring that an essential aspect of good, as laid out in the alignment system, is freedom. Slavery (and serfdom) are both incompatible with freedom and, therefore, at best, selfish. Can you remain good if you diverge strongly from a good alignment on a single question? Can you remain good if you accept as proper those things that are divorced from the definition of good? That is a question for a GM to decide.

You want to invent the values of fictional people in a fictional world, and say we should be examining them through that lens, but there's zero indication that we should view alignment, a descriptive measure of a person's actions, through anything but a modern lens. The only way you reach "Well, slavery might be good sometimes" is if you don't view slaves as people deserving, as the book says, "life and freedom".

You are correct I was commenting in ignorance of that point (fourth word of third sentence in description of good). At the same time you should have lead with "However, life and freedom are of the highest priority" instead of #4 and #7 as a good aligned person's reason for being against slavery.

In light of that a feudal knight shouldnt be allowed to be a good alignment as a feudal knight serves a monarch who owns serfs who have no freedom just as a knight truly has no freedom in service to his Lord.

With that single sentence I abdicate my possition and agree with you, that good will not tolerate slavery or serfdom. But add that they would not be knights or samurai as both serve tyrants who both hold serfs in servitude.

[Library Ogre]

You are correct I was commenting in ignorance of that point (fourth word of third sentence in description of good). At the same time you should have lead with "However, life and freedom are of the highest priority" instead of #4 and #7 as a good aligned person's reason for being against slavery.

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

I did lead with that. I provided a page citation for it. It is bolded above.

As I also said, slavery and serfdom are, at best, selfish institutions, because while selfish (particularly anarchist) may provide lip-service to ideals of freedom, they're mostly interested in their OWN freedom, and only secondarily in that of others. Because of the nature of Palladium's alignment system, you wind up with several places where different alignments overlap... someone may be generally Unprincipled, but they benefit from a system of servitude, pushing them more to Anarchist just as part of that system. I know of some older attempts to more precisely quantify alignments, leading to a more nuanced system, but that's not what we really have right now.

[Zer0 Kay]

You are correct I was commenting in ignorance of that point (fourth word of third sentence in description of good). At the same time you should have lead with "However, life and freedom are of the highest priority" instead of #4 and #7 as a good aligned person's reason for being against slavery.

The alignments in Palladium are defined by actions. Slavery is incompatible with good alignments, for whom "life and freedom are of the highest priority." (p 23 of PFRPG). Both Good Alignments (and Unprincipled) will "Always help others" and "Never harm an innocent." These are incompatible with slavery.

Notably, all the evil alignments, and Anarchist, will use or kidnap an innocent. All see torture as a viable means of control.

I did not write the alignment system, but slavery is incompatible with a good alignment.

I did lead with that. I provided a page citation for it. It is bolded above.

As I also said, slavery and serfdom are, at best, selfish institutions, because while selfish (particularly anarchist) may provide lip-service to ideals of freedom, they're mostly interested in their OWN freedom, and only secondarily in that of others. Because of the nature of Palladium's alignment system, you wind up with several places where different alignments overlap... someone may be generally Unprincipled, but they benefit from a system of servitude, pushing them more to Anarchist just as part of that system. I know of some older attempts to more precisely quantify alignments, leading to a more nuanced system, but that's not what we really have right now.

Ahhhh. I missed that. daang looks like I completely agree with you then. and I'm guilty of thinking you were practicing eisegesis. Come to find out I'm just skipping entire blocks of text and don't remember the paragraphs under good. Though I dont like how it basically paints most historical figures as at best selfish. Oh well it is a game and not meant to be taken too seriously.

Thank you Mark. As usual a gentleman.

[Zer0 Kay]

But why are you comparing A Fantasy world to the modern world? Does that mean that Sumeria, Babylon, Egypt, Persia, China... every freaking empire prior to midway through the last millennia still practiced slavery in some form and are therefore evil? So does that mean that India, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, North Korea and Cambodia are evil?

To my moral alignment yeah I would say that yes, if they allow slavery I think the world would be better off without them,
But
I also don't think that my morals should be forced on anyone either, and I don't understand the situations there well enough to say that getting rid of it would help or hinder, but i think it would be worth a try as there are lots of places around the world that do get by without slavery.


“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke”

So very primary directive. However following the primary directive does not leave room for Sir Edmund Burke. But indeed if anyone was to increase the wages of sweatshop workers in China to a Western "living wage" they would destabilize the economy as they would be paid near Chinese National doctor wages. Making becoming a doctor less desirable.

[kiralon]

So very primary directive. However following the primary directive does not leave room for Sir Edmund Burke. But indeed if anyone was to increase the wages of sweatshop workers in China to a Western "living wage" they would destabilize the economy as they would be paid near Chinese National doctor wages. Making becoming a doctor less desirable.

But would that be a bad thing and at least they would have a choice, and that same choice occurs in say america and america seems to have enough doctors. If people start getting enough food each day with extra income left over they can start worrying about thing like education and the terrible environmental damage that has occurred there. (Coronavirus has killed 600,000 people or so worldwide, its estimated 1,600,000 people die from air pollution complications in china alone each year).
Slavery also tends to breed contempt for other humans and also have lots of nasty crimes involved around it (like kidnapping to feed the slave trade, not to mention what happens to the slaves). So if you have a ruling regime that doesn't care about slavery, chances are the mindset around allowing it also then allow the thoughts like the peasants are there just be used and abused, so the ruling party would tend to not be very nice as well (Selfish asshats at best).

[Zer0 Kay]

So very primary directive. However following the primary directive does not leave room for Sir Edmund Burke. But indeed if anyone was to increase the wages of sweatshop workers in China to a Western "living wage" they would destabilize the economy as they would be paid near Chinese National doctor wages. Making becoming a doctor less desirable.

But would that be a bad thing and at least they would have a choice, and that same choice occurs in say america and america seems to have enough doctors. If people start getting enough food each day with extra income left over they can start worrying about thing like education and the terrible environmental damage that has occurred there. (Coronavirus has killed 600,000 people or so worldwide, its estimated 1,600,000 people die from air pollution complications in china alone each year).
Slavery also tends to breed contempt for other humans and also have lots of nasty crimes involved around it (like kidnapping to feed the slave trade, not to mention what happens to the slaves). So if you have a ruling regime that doesn't care about slavery, chances are the mindset around allowing it also then allow the thoughts like the peasants are there just be used and abused, so the ruling party would tend to not be very nice as well (Selfish asshats at best).

So you think a country losing doctors because they'd rather do something easier with less stress or liability as a good thing? The entire system must be elevated not just the parts that work for foreign countries that see that particular field as unfair. I wish we could elevate entire countries but it has never been done successfully through the interference of a foreign nation.

[kiralon]

So you think a country losing doctors because they'd rather do something easier with less stress or liability as a good thing? The entire system must be elevated not just the parts that work for foreign countries that see that particular field as unfair. I wish we could elevate entire countries but it has never been done successfully through the interference of a foreign nation.

How much doctoring do you think a slave or the extremely poor get (and if the middle/upper class start missing out on doctoring they will start to rectify the problem anyway), not to mention the current regimes would have to change for slavery to be abolished, and a new regime that abolishes slavery would be more likely to accept help from the outside world, and in general i think the outside world would send help, rather than the current regimes that will do anything to save face, up to and including doing atrocities to save face and that won't accept outside help as it might show they are too weak to help their people themselves and they are too proud to ask for or accept help, and i cant think of a time that a foreign power helped to actually help, rather than try to cement power, money or both.

[Zer0 Kay]

So you think a country losing doctors because they'd rather do something easier with less stress or liability as a good thing? The entire system must be elevated not just the parts that work for foreign countries that see that particular field as unfair. I wish we could elevate entire countries but it has never been done successfully through the interference of a foreign nation.

How much doctoring do you think a slave or the extremely poor get (and if the middle/upper class start missing out on doctoring they will start to rectify the problem anyway), not to mention the current regimes would have to change for slavery to be abolished, and a new regime that abolishes slavery would be more likely to accept help from the outside world, and in general i think the outside world would send help, rather than the current regimes that will do anything to save face, up to and including doing atrocities to save face and that won't accept outside help as it might show they are too weak to help their people themselves and they are too proud to ask for or accept help, and i cant think of a time that a foreign power helped to actually help, rather than try to cement power, money or both.

Why are you combining two things? Raising the culture from sweatshop wages for the least is different than abolishing slavery. True that right now most countries that have sweatshops also have slavery but my point is starting economic changes in the bottom instead of in a holistic method destabilizes the entire economy. Causing collapse, causing chaos, causing death.

[kiralon]

erm, i didn't mention sweatshops?

[Zer0 Kay]

erm, i didn't mention sweatshops?

Nope you didn't. Nor did you mention economic manipulation or peasants/surfs in a feudal system essentially being slaves thereby making any monarchy a land of slavery. No feudal system = no kingdom and then the royalty are just as fake as the "monarchs" living today.

[kiralon]

Was just trying to follow your mention of me combining things, if i didn't mention sweatshops how could i be combining it with getting rid of slavery.

But anyway slavery abolishment didn't work well in some place but did in others. I think the english way was one of the better ways as it avoided (chaos death and destabilisation for one)helping cause a civil war and the cost was paid by the government through taxes, as it was a social problem and that society needed to pay to get rid of it.

Most places that abolished slavery improved the quality of life for people in the long run, and the evil that surrounds slavery makes it worth getting rid of.

[Zer0 Kay]

Was just trying to follow your mention of me combining things, if i didn't mention sweatshops how could i be combining it with getting rid of slavery.

But anyway slavery abolishment didn't work well in some place but did in others. I think the english way was one of the better ways as it avoided (chaos death and destabilisation for one)helping cause a civil war and the cost was paid by the government through taxes, as it was a social problem and that society needed to pay to get rid of it.

Most places that abolished slavery improved the quality of life for people in the long run, and the evil that surrounds slavery makes it worth getting rid of.

OOOOOOh. I was talking about how your response combined economic manipulation and slavery with the question "How much doctoring do you think a slave..." When my comment on increasing pay in sweatshops will destabilize areas because it would make a sweatshop worker be paid as much as a doctor in the same area. My comment on economic manipulation... reformation... whatever, is in a different context from slavery. They're two different conversations

[kiralon]

aha, that makes more sense now. Thanks for clearing it up.
And yes that could certainly happen, but from what i have seen some people would still be doctors just to help people, and improved wages usually means more taxes so can sometimes improve a place, or it could collapse in on itself, but unless war breaks out, which can also be an effect, the economy/population will even itself out, but will have some hard hard times.

i don't like sweatshops either, because they are usually very lax on even basic safety and the conditions tend to be horrid (and is almost another form of slavery).

[Zer0 Kay]

aha, that makes more sense now. Thanks for clearing it up.
And yes that could certainly happen, but from what i have seen some people would still be doctors just to help people, and improved wages usually means more taxes so can sometimes improve a place, or it could collapse in on itself, but unless war breaks out, which can also be an effect, the economy/population will even itself out, but will have some hard hard times.

i don't like sweatshops either, because they are usually very lax on even basic safety and the conditions tend to be horrid (and is almost another form of slavery).

Agreed. I like those kinds of doctors, but there doesn't seem to be enough. Agree on sweatshops too.