Slavery....in Space!

[kuros]

If one is going to get persnickety, what about the most common species of slavery in Traveller, which has the victims risking life and limb and almost requires them to break the law.

I refer, of course, to the huge mortgage payments that characters have to pay to own a starship.

And perhaps that most insidious slavery of all, for don't the PC's have to obey the player's every whim? :rofl:

(I have had dreams about that last one.)

Curiously, the thing that I like MOST about Classic Traveller is that rather than starting off as a Lvl 1 Newb, we all start off with a random set of skills that are emminently unmarketable, and a mortgage.

 

[DangerousThing]

(I have had dreams about that last one.)

Curiously, the thing that I like MOST about Classic Traveller is that rather than starting off as a Lvl 1 Newb, we all start off with a random set of skills that are emminently unmarketable, and a mortgage.

(PCS as slaves of the players)

Well, it makes it nice for the GM also.

However when I was in college, back when the dinosaurs ruled the Earth, I didn't like having to play "old guys" to have any skills. You know, people in their fifties with one foot in the grave.

Of course now that I'm that age (54) myself, the characters don't seem so old.

But I can see PCs resenting the mortgage, and I'm glad that T5 kept the idea of the "ship share" so that the characters might pay off the ship before they die.

And I now realize that PCs rarely get a chance to die of old age.

 

[kuros]

I've been gaming for over 30 years (meep!) and in all that time, excluding campaigns that ended prematurely for some reason, I've had exactly one character live happily ever after. He had reached a power level where he started becoming the Fixer rather than the 'runner, and was now the guy who would assemble teams of brave 1st Lvl newbs and send them off on missions.

Everybody else has died gloriously. In fact, if we know that a campaign is going to end, I pretty much insist that my character dies before the end of the last session. My college-era GM was really good about setting up death situations which served to underline the basic conflict of the PC's life.

 

[Ishmael]

Yes, it is science, just not Equity Theory that matters in this case. Basic economics determines the economic feasibility of forced labor, of which chattel slavery is but one form.

Equity theory seems to assume that everyone is operating under the same social conventions and codes of ethics without much in the way of how different viewpoints can affect things. Nor does it seem to consider that some conditions may be bad, but the alternatives may be seen as being much worse, such that they'll choose the lesser of two evils. As a result, Equity Theory has failed to describe the fact that slavery in most of its forms were accepted institutions within all major cultures since the beginning of human history.

However, basic economics can decsribe such conditions where slavery can exist.

If we look at labor as capital neccessary for production ( even robots are labor ), and that this capital must be purchased through the use of wages and other benefits, then it becomes obvious that labor also is affected by the laws of supply and demand. In the case we are focussed on, this will be unskilled labor.

In instances where the demand for unskilled labor is far greater than the supply of unskilled labor, the costs for that labor increases. However, at no time would any employer be able to pay a worker more than the marginal revenue product in wages/benefits; it is not possible to make a profit on selling a product that sells for less than it takes to produce. Forced labor, or other form of slavery exists when the employer deliberately underpays the worker and forces that worker to accept such low payment under threat of duress. Slavery expands when entrepenuers become slavers and work to fill the demand with a supply of labor at costs the employer can accept, but are far lower than a worker can ask in a balanced labor market.

The situation for wage slaves are reversed from the above. When the supply of unskilled labor exceeds the demand, labor costs are driven down, perhaps even below sustenance/poverty levels. Without laws or labor unions to protect individual workers, those workers are unable to effectively bargain for better compensation. Should a worker be injured or have some other condition that might cause him to not produce output, he can be fired and a replacement hired at the same or lower cost.

Both of these economic conditions exist within the OTU and thus there are places in the OTU where slavery of some form or another is profitable, even just in the Spinward Marches.

 

[Darkwing]

Slavery largely appeared for lack of population, and then disappeared because it was an inefficient way to handle labor. IMO, in a universe with a high level of automation of tasks, the bigger question is what people are going to do? So the idea of slavery is rather redundant.

I disagree. In a lower tech society (classical era), population was high enough that it was not necessary, according to your argument. But it was a holdover from the barbarian days, when slaves helped fill out the labor needs of a tribe. It was economically useful then, but it also gave free men someone to look down on.
In an interstellar environment, slaves would be useful to low-tech worlds that star-traders stop at to get low-tech hand-crafted goods and raw materials - "hey, chief, I'll sell you some wogs from another planet, you can have them mine this stuff, and we'll trade more slaves for more metal". Of course, said slaver captain would be careful not to call them wogs in civilized society, but on runs, he'd have to dehumanize them.
The other end of interstellar slavery is high-tech worlds. There, slaves would either be ego-boosts ("yeah, I don't need a slave as a valet; my Naasirka robot does it better. But it's such a charge making a real person wait on me") or sex-trafficking.
My players are trying to get into smuggling, but I haven't mentioned interstellar slaving to them yet. I'm thinking now about GenAssist TuberZombies with an implanted slave mentality, in addition to the Solomani military TuberZombie soldiers I was already thinking of introducing...

 

[atpollard]

Both of these economic conditions exist within the OTU and thus there are places in the OTU where slavery of some form or another is profitable, even just in the Spinward Marches.

Great post, lots of useful info.

In the Imperium of the OTU, slavery is illegal; would this trump Economics in the Marches?

 

[Dragoner]

Equity Theory...

Put in layman's terms it is the fairness of a transaction one feels, so it has been part of the human psychological makeup since the very beginning.

Basic economics ....

Is not a term used in economics generally, Econ 101 is usually called microeconomics: the study of the principles of how small systems work; and as one gets more advanced it becomes macroeconomics: the study of larger systems (national and global economics for example).

even robots are labor

This is incorrect, both labor and machinery do work, but are not the same. Labor pertains to humans and has its associated costs, which go under labor costs; machinery is a fixed cost and goes under plant and equipment, you would not create a labor schedule for machinery, machinery replaces labor usually.

unskilled labor

Is by far the smallest portion of labor in an advanced economy such as the Imperium or other starship building economies.

Slavery expands when entrepenuers become slavers and work to fill the demand with a supply of labor at costs the employer can accept, but are far lower than a worker can ask in a balanced labor market.

No, there are other costs associated with slavery beyond contracted (ie wage) labor, such as security, which also engenders higher total liability costs, for example: how do you offset the liability if your slaves escape and do damage beyond your organization? Not only would you be heavily sued, but you would incur a "societal cost" of having to maintain a security apparatus to enforce slavery while protecting society from your slaves, which represents a huge lost opportunity cost of spending that public revenue elsewhere. Societies are generally adverse to spending their money for the benefit of individual business, it does happen, but within reason and not when the more efficient option (free labor) is cheaper.

In a lower tech society (classical era)...

Primitive society economics are centered around subsistence farming, which is not the focus of modern or future economies; so the comparitive analysis does not match between the two.

The other end of interstellar slavery is high-tech worlds. There, slaves would either be ego-boosts ("yeah, I don't need a slave as a valet; my Naasirka robot does it better).

High tech worlds would not want or need savery for economic reasons, slaves are higher cost and less productive than contract labor.

The roomba doesn't require extra external/internal security costs as do slaves, nor engendering the same generally liability.

If the Zhodani invade your world, you would not be worried that your robot valet would become a fifth column and rise up against you, like you would with slaves. The robots could be hacked, but that is another thread for discussion elsewhere.

My players are trying to get into smuggling, but I haven't mentioned interstellar slaving to them yet. I'm thinking now about GenAssist TuberZombies with an implanted slave mentality, in addition to the Solomani military TuberZombie soldiers I was already thinking of introducing...

Creating an artificial condition is fine, my argument is only against using the principles of economics and business to support slavery; if you want to use TuberZombies in your traveller universe, I have no argument with that.

 

[Darkwing]

Primitive society economics are centered around subsistence farming, which is not the focus of modern or future economies; so the comparitive analysis does not match between the two.

But it does on the primitive worlds one can reach by starship, and there's no Prime Directive.

High tech worlds would not want or need savery for economic reasons, slaves are higher cost and less productive than contract labor.

My point here: ego / powertrip & sex.

Creating an artificial condition is fine, my argument is only against using the principles of economics and business to support slavery; if you want to use TuberZombies in your traveller universe, I have no argument with that.

Well, it'll raise the players' hackles more once they realize they're not just slaves, but grown from a test tube and conditioned for it.

 

[Dragoner]

But it does on the primitive worlds one can reach by starship, and there's no Prime Directive.

Except for the aforementioned security concerns, which supports in a clear and logical manner why the Imperium forbids slavery.

My point here: ego / powertrip & sex.

Which isn't about economic viability, which is my point. However, I think the valet slave fails due to security and the sex slave...that is a rape fantasy in an rpg, which is neither fun nor cool to me, so I wouldn't play it, no matter how much "realism" it might have.

 

[DangerousThing]

Put in layman's terms it is the fairness of a transaction one feels, so it has been part of the human psychological makeup since the very beginning.

I don't think that Adam's equity theory applies here. Slavery is a different thing entirely than traditional employment.

Is not a term used in economics generally, Econ 101 is usually called microeconomics: the study of the principles of how small systems work; and as one gets more advanced it becomes macroeconomics: the study of larger systems (national and global economics for example).

Now you're being picky because Ishmeal isn't using the correct terminology rather than debating his argument. I'll delete the several other places you do this.

Is by far the smallest portion of labor in an advanced economy such as the Imperium or other starship building economies.

Of course. Unskilled labor would be more likely to be used on primitive planets, at least as labor.

No, there are other costs associated with slavery beyond contracted (ie wage) labor, such as security, which also engenders higher total liability costs, for example: how do you offset the liability if your slaves escape and do damage beyond your organization? Not only would you be heavily sued, but you would incur a "societal cost" of having to maintain a security apparatus to enforce slavery while protecting society from your slaves, which represents a huge lost opportunity cost of spending that public revenue elsewhere. Societies are generally adverse to spending their money for the benefit of individual business, it does happen, but within reason and not when the more efficient option (free labor) is cheaper.

And yet many primative societies, if not most of them, had slavery. And most of them had a low cost of security for several reasons.

1. The slaves were often taken from so far away that they couldn't go back home again easily even if they could escape by walking away.
2. Slaves were usually treated well, better than the poor in the cities. After all, you don't get labor out of malnourished slaves.
3. The societies accepted slavery. This is an important one. If you accept that you are a slave then you are less likely to escape.
4. Slaves were often given a chance to advance, if they had skills that were needed.

If you are taking somebody by starship to a primitive planet, they aren't likely to feel that they can get home again.

When the slaves were freed in the US after the Civil War, there were many recorded instances of slaves not wanting to go because previously they had at least a home and food.

Artisans might be another class that would be profitable to sell as slaves. I could imagine a market for craftsmen from a slightly higher TL to produce better fill-in-the-blanks. I could even imagine a charitable institution devoted to bringing people into mainstream civilization using this technique by having themselves sold under these conditions. Or even deliberately captured. They'd have to be clever about it though, because low technology doesn't imply stupidity.

If the Zhodani invade your world, you would not be worried that your robot valet would become a fifth column and rise up against you, like you would with slaves. The robots could be hacked, but that is another thread for discussion elsewhere.

You run the risk that any sophont servant could be working against your best interest.

 

[Darkwing]

Except for the aforementioned security concerns, which supports in a clear and logical manner why the Imperium forbids slavery.

I don't care if they do forbid it. It will still exist; someone will find a way to profit from it. In real life, yes, I abhor it. That doesn't mean I think laws against it are very effective.

Which isn't about economic viability, which is my point. However, I think the valet slave fails due to security and the sex slave...that is a rape fantasy in an rpg, which is neither fun nor cool to me, so I wouldn't play it, no matter how much "realism" it might have.

Um, I think you put too much emphasis on security - as has been suggested, a slave taken by starship from the only world they know will not be a sophisticated security threat, and the kind of people who enjoy that powertrip have security people to watch the slave for them - yet another demonstration of their power and ego. Also, the "rape fantasy" remark is offensive, as it presumes the player and/or gamemaster are portraying it for the purpose of indulging in simulated sex. Games that do that tend to be adolescents, and they usually just have irresistible charisma scores causing the women to swoon for them. But when more grown-up players find out someone is a sex slave, they tend to get all quixotic and want to end the slave trade.

 

[DangerousThing]

But when more grown-up players find out someone is a sex slave, they tend to get all quixotic and want to end the slave trade.

And that's how I want it as a GM, as long as the players think through things. Sometimes things are not as bad as they seem, and sometimes they are far worse.

 

[aramis]

I don't care if they do forbid it. It will still exist; someone will find a way to profit from it. In real life, yes, I abhor it. That doesn't mean I think laws against it are very effective.

The laws have reduced it to areas of (typically) vice and household servitude.

Manufacturing slaves are readily seen as "eager to escape," but the truth is, if well fed, provided some recreation time, and given reasonable quotas (and bonuses and visible praise for exceeding them), most won't cause a bit of trouble if institutional slavery is normative.

Especially given off-world transit, and that many worlds will not be known to locals by the same names as used on the interstellar circuit.

Household servants, indentured, especially slave, may not feel any need to escape, and may in fact see themselves as part of the family they work for. Historically, that was the pattern. As long as they weren't sold off, it was generally a pretty nice gig.

 

[Dragoner]

I don't think that Adam's equity theory applies here.

Basic psychology is always applicable.

Now you're being picky...

No, I am being precise. The argument is wrong.

And yet many primative societies, if not most of them, had slavery.

Which the Imperium is not and that is not what the discussion is about. Things were different in the past, yes; but if you are going to say that the Pyramids were built by slaves, no that is incorrect; much of this goes back to the aforementioned power distance of other cultures.

If you are taking somebody by starship to a primitive planet, they aren't likely to feel that they can get home again.

What?

When the slaves were freed in the US after the Civil War, there were many recorded instances of slaves not wanting to go because previously they had at least a home and food.

As well as Nat Turner before the ACW and huge legal battles over escaped slaves, which goes to prove my point about costs.

It will still exist; someone will find a way to profit from it.

Large scale in comparison to modern HRM, no, it is not profitable.

Um, I think you put too much emphasis on security ...

You mean like they did in the south or ancient Rome? They were terrified of slave rebellions, nobody today is worried about McDonald's employees rebelling.

Also, the "rape fantasy" remark is offensive, as it presumes the player and/or gamemaster are portraying it for the purpose of indulging in simulated sex. Games that do that tend to be adolescents, and they usually just have irresistible charisma scores causing the women to swoon for them.

Offensive to who? It is wrong to pin that on kids, plenty of adults are twisted, moreso I would imagine.

This is beginning to wear me out, the whole subject matter is rather distasteful, esp over the holidays.

 

[Darkwing]

Basic psychology is always applicable.

Which you seem to miss.

Which the Imperium is not and that is not what the discussion is about. Things were different in the past, yes; but if you are going to say that the Pyramids were built by slaves, no that is incorrect; much of this goes back to the aforementioned power distance of other cultures.

The Imperium is full of primitive planets that slavery exists on, and not-so-primitive ones where some nasty types just enjoy that.

As well as Nat Turner before the ACW and huge legal battles over escaped slaves, which goes to prove my point about costs.

Part of the cost of doing business. If ya gotta pay, cough up. That's easier than thinking outside the box to get out of the problem. Basic psychology again.

Large scale in comparison to modern HRM, no, it is not profitable.

The real world belies your thesis. Human trafficking is big business all over the world.

You mean like they did in the south or ancient Rome? They were terrified of slave rebellions, nobody today is worried about McDonald's employees rebelling.

The South, yes. They still didn't think about it EXCEPT when something stirred up trouble. Rome? No. They were terrified of the MOB - not slave rebellions, so much as ALL the lower classes revolting.

Offensive to who? It is wrong to pin that on kids, plenty of adults are twisted, moreso I would imagine.

Your imputation was that including sex slaves in one's game means the plsyers and/or GM want to roleplay rape. You don't think it's offensive to imply that? And your response is nonsense. If you started as a kid, you probably remember some juvenile "adventures" where your studly PC got laid. It's normal, if immature, and not twisted or something to "pin" on kids. The twisted adults you refer to I don't think are likely to roleplay well with others.

This is beginning to wear me out, the whole subject matter is rather distasteful, esp over the holidays.

Psychology again?

 

[rancke]

The Imperium is full of primitive planets that slavery exists on, and not-so-primitive ones where some nasty types just enjoy that.

Could you back that up with some examples or a canonical statement to that effect?

The Imperium is not full of primitive planets, and the primitive planets there are are mostly interdicted.

There are no doubt worlds with practices that some people equate with slavery, but generally anything like that has either been scrutinized by Imperial authorities and declared not to be slavery or is illegal and clandestine.


Hans

 

[Dragoner]

Which you seem to miss.


The Imperium is full of primitive planets that slavery exists on, and not-so-primitive ones where some nasty types just enjoy that.

Part of the cost of doing business. If ya gotta pay, cough up. That's easier than thinking outside the box to get out of the problem. Basic psychology again.

The real world belies your thesis. Human trafficking is big business all over the world.

The South, yes. They still didn't think about it EXCEPT when something stirred up trouble. Rome? No. They were terrified of the MOB - not slave rebellions, so much as ALL the lower classes revolting.

Your imputation was that including sex slaves in one's game means the plsyers and/or GM want to roleplay rape. You don't think it's offensive to imply that? And your response is nonsense. If you started as a kid, you probably remember some juvenile "adventures" where your studly PC got laid. It's normal, if immature, and not twisted or something to "pin" on kids. The twisted adults you refer to I don't think are likely to roleplay well with others.

Psychology again?

Insults merely show the weakness of your argument.

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[aramis]

Could you back that up with some examples or a canonical statement to that effect?

The Imperium is not full of primitive planets, and the primitive planets there are are mostly interdicted.

There are no doubt worlds with practices that some people equate with slavery, but generally anything like that has either been scrutinized by Imperial authorities and declared not to be slavery or is illegal and clandestine.


Hans

Pysadi is primitive enough (TL5 - wild west level tech), not interdicted. Spinward Marches 3008.

Heading over to TravellerMap.com, I find a handful of primitive worlds

Spinward Marches no zone at all, imperial worlds, TL 6 and below
Ianic 1924 TL5
Rabwhar 1822 TL 6
Byret 2523 TL 6
La'Belle 2416 TL 4
Vreifrebeger 2415 TL3
Rech 2112 TL6
Pirema 2314 TL5
Gileden 2514 TL6
Heya 2402 TL5
Knorbes 1807 TL2
Forboldn 1808 TL5
Arcadia 1217 TL6

And that's not exhaustive.

Skipping over to core SUBsector
2317 TL5 Codsen - 2 pc from Capital
2413 TL6 Capion
2210 TL5 Gis
2220 TL4 Xalm

 

[rancke]

Pysadi is primitive enough (TL5 - wild west level tech), not interdicted. Spinward Marches 3008.

TL5 is "circa 1900 to 1939", about two generations after wild west level. Or as the tech level charts call is, Industrial Tech. That's not primitive. Nor is TL4, Early Industrial (circa 1860 to 1900). As for the examples of non-interdicted TL 0-3 worlds, I said 'most', not 'all'. There are reasons why a world may be culturally advanced and still technologically backward. The simplest explanation is technological renunciates. It's the canonical explanation for Rorre/Darrian and my (non-canonical) explanation for Knorbes.


Hans

 

[Darkwing]

Insults merely show the weakness of your argument.

Welcome to my ignore list.

You sneer, then dismiss replies as insults and choose to play the wounded victim. Yeah, I wasn't overly genteel, but I avoided being deliberately insulting.

Could you back that up with some examples or a canonical statement to that effect?

The Imperium is not full of primitive planets, and the primitive planets there are are mostly interdicted.

I won't replicate others list here, but I was a little imprecise. If you mean Imp memberworlds that are low-tech, not so much. But inside Imperial space and not members yet? They exist. And slapping an interdict on a planet means little. Remember the Shionthy belt?

There are no doubt worlds with practices that some people equate with slavery, but generally anything like that has either been scrutinized by Imperial authorities and declared not to be slavery or is illegal and clandestine.
Hans

That works for Imp member worlds. Not so much for planets just outside Imp space or low-tech planets in Imp space but not yet participating in the Imperium. And TL-5 IS primitive to a TL-12+ sophont used to a galaxy-spanning empire. I seriously doubt the Imps have nothing better to do than interfere in each and every low-tech culture to just to feel like they've stamped out slavery. Once said planet starts getting regular traffic stopping off to trade, then they'll need to do something.