I doubt it but am still curious
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, Absalom has historically allowed slavery but I believe an event (in PFS?) lead to the manumission of any slave who rose to the city's defense, which should have pretty much wiped out the institution.
I think, going forward, "participates in or tolerates slavery" should not be a thing for non-evil people. I mean, by Starfinder times Abadar has come around and opposes it.
Cheliax under Aroden had slavery. Aroden was lawful neutral.
I seem to recall seeing several other instances of this evil institution in nations that were neutral on the good/evil axis.
Now that I think about it, slavery seems to be more common in lawful neutral than in chaotic neutral nations.
What would non-evil slavery look like? I imagine people would only be made slaves as punishment for crimes and the like, and I figure slaves would have laws protecting them from abuse rather than just being considered their master's belongings that they can treat any way they plese.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What would non-evil slavery look like?
No such thing, slavery is always evil. But a neutral country or a neutral person is able to tolerate or perpetrate a certain amount of evil without themselves being evil.
People with a zero tolerance for evil are "good" not "neutral."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK that makes sense. I imagine good aligned people living there would still lobby to make slavery illegal, and likely help slaves escape (though of course they can't do that for everyone.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Plenty of Neutral countries in Golarion allow slavery. Katapesh is the obvious one.
Pesh and slaves are two of its major exports.
So not just slaves, narcotics too.
Also...Slavery is legal in Rahadoum, and is generally quite common.Serfdom, as present in much of Europe in the middle ages and in Russia until the 1900s, is a small step away from slavery. You're effectively a subject of your immediate Lord, who may have various unwelcome rights and powers over you, whether legal or not. Taldor (N) has this:
In the countryside, most of Taldor's poor live as serfs, farmers, or craftsmen, slaves to their lords or prefecture governors.
Alternatively, there's commercial slavery as shown in places like Darkwood Vale, where the populace owe their soul to the company store (tm) and so are effectively property of the Lumber Corporation. And that's in Andoran, the poster boy NG country.
Is conscription slavery? You're forced, whether you like it or not, to join the army and fight and die for something you may not like. The penalty for refusal or disobedience may well be death. See also press gangs. Molthune (LN) is the obvious country here.
Actually, Molthune does explicitly have slavery.
Beneath both castes are slaves; however, their ownership is strictly regulated and Molthune is one of the better nations in which a slave might live. Slaves can, in fact, free themselves of their servitude to become full citizens with proper legal education. Although the process is lengthy, the fact that it exists at all means that slaves have more of a future in Molthune than in most other slave-holding nations.[2] Although it is not forbidden for slaves to carry weapons openly in Molthune, it is an unusual sight
The Lands of the Linnorm Kings might have thralls, if we take them to be Viking clones. PFWiki doesn't say, and IDHMBWM.
Organized Play Developer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, Absalom has historically allowed slavery but I believe an event (in PFS?) lead to the manumission of any slave who rose to the city's defense, which should have pretty much wiped out the institution.
I think, going forward, "participates in or tolerates slavery" should not be a thing for non-evil people. I mean, by Starfinder times Abadar has come around and opposes it.
Absalom used to allow slave-trading in the docks district and slaves legally acquired there or elsewhere could be kept and taken into other parts of the city. Following the Fiendflesh Siege slave-trading was abolished in Absalom, and general tolerance for it will likely have declined sharply as many of the manumitted former slaves are now citizens and guards in Absalom.
What would non-evil slavery look like?No such thing, slavery is always evil.
This is always circular without a sharply defined meaning of "slavery." Otherwise things that can easily follow under a broad "slavery" umbrella get defined out somewhat arbitrarily, like indentured servitude, military drafts, and chain gangs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is always circular without a sharply defined meaning of "slavery." Otherwise things that can easily follow under a broad "slavery" umbrella get defined out somewhat arbitrarily, like indentured servitude, military drafts, and chain gangs.What would non-evil slavery look like?No such thing, slavery is always evil.
I don't see how this is different from "murder is evil" or "theft is evil" though. Sure, we can play linguistic games with "what about this particular set of circumstances" but the meaning is clear.
I don't see how this is different from "murder is evil" or "theft is evil" though. Sure, we can play linguistic games with "what about this particular set of circumstances" but the meaning is clear.This is always circular without a sharply defined meaning of "slavery." Otherwise things that can easily follow under a broad "slavery" umbrella get defined out somewhat arbitrarily, like indentured servitude, military drafts, and chain gangs.What would non-evil slavery look like?No such thing, slavery is always evil.
It's not different, and you've just conceded my point.
Murder isn't evil, because murder is just an unlawful killing that lacks a legally accepted defense/justification, and the laws don't determine morality, although one would wish for them to sort of track it. But I doubt Cheliax's laws on murder have much to do with the moral content of a killing.
If you just mean "murder" is by your definition an "evil" killing, then it's circular and pointless to say that murder is evil - you're just stating a tautology. The same for "slavery is always evil." Well, ok, then what is "slavery"?
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slavery is morally wrong but evil might be too strong a word.No.
Whether it is neutral or evil depends on the details.No.
Before the 1800s slavery was standard across the world through all of recorded history. Even the Old Testament contains instructions on how to treat slaves!That doesn't make it okay.
Freedom is a relatively modern notion.It is not.
Peasants and serfs in most cultures were virtual slaves be they Chinese peasants, European serfs, ancient Egyptian commoners or African tribesmen ruled by the likes of Shaka Zulu.And that was bad.
In other words, an RPG that wants to simulate any real-world historical culture needs to interpret slavery through that lens.Pathfinder and Golarion have never done that. They don't even take place on Earth.
Morality (good, evil, neutral) can be defined in the cultural context by how the slave-owner treats their slaves.
No it can not.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not trying to justify slavery which I personally find repugnant.You're running defense for them.
However, when trying to understand historical cultures which practiced slavery and never questioned it,That's an assumption you are having.
then individuals within that society should be judged based on how they treated their slaves.And owning falls under treating.
E.g. George Washington and the founding fathers, the Old Testament kings, citizens of the ancient Greek democracies, the medieval European aristocracy, the heroic figures of Asian cultures, etc.Were not actually benevolent and good people.
To simply label them all "evil" because of a standard, historical cultural trait seems extremely arrogant.Arroagnce is claiming that since everyone does this it must be okay.
We have the benefit of our modern C21st culture and educations,Moral relativism regarding time is nonsense. We aren't as a race genetically moraller than we were previously.
they did not.Yes, we owe our souls and sense of humanity all to Candy Crush.
So the measure must be how they behaved within their own cultural context.No, some things are universals, just because certain cultures did it does not make it okay.
And yes, this is relevant to Golarion, which has many pseudo-historical culturesNo it does not.
-- from the Land of the Linnorm Kings (Viking), to Osirion (ancient Egypt), Qadira (Arabia-Persia), Vudra (India), Tian Xia (incl. Japan, China, Burma and others), etc.Those are themes and aesthetics. Not an attempt at any historical accuracy or mirroring.
Purging all of them of cultural elements we find distasteful to make them PCAhhhh, there we have it.
would remove something from the gameIt would do no so such thing.
-- the ability to use the fantasy culture to see the world as an historical-real-world-culture, warts and all, once did.Golarion is in no way,shape, or form set up to do any of this. It was never intended to do this.
The aim is not to justify historical wrongs,Which I do not believe Paizo does.
but to try to capture or experience a very different and alien cultural perspective.
Which we get from it being a made up fantasy setting, not by being "historically accurate". We do not require slavery to experience anything, we certainly gain nothing by trying to make it non-evil.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slavery is one of those moral "magnetic norths" which you can set your compass by, it is always evil in 100% of cases and anything else that resembles it is also probably evil.
Spending time and effort to justify "well, in this particular case..." is probably an opportunity for some self-reflection.
