About that slave trade...

[Claremont Waltz]

economical theory

today's slaves are those people that offer themselves for cheap

Dog there is a world of difference between chattel "I have legal title to you and your descendents in perpetuity and can dispose of you as I wish" slavery and "I believe I am underpaid for the work I do".

Debt bondage existed and continues to exist. Most "sweatshops" are not good examples. Many pay worse than what a westerner would get, but provide better work hours, more reliability and similar or better income to subsistence farming, day labor or other viable alternatives.

, some places there may still be people that are forced into literal slavery (by force)

Mostly women, and mostly for sex. It is a serious issue. Some unfortunate people are tricked into coming to a country for work only to have their passport taken from them so that they can be forced to work in incredibly poor conditions with nil pay ad famously happened in Russia not long ago, but this is a much rarer event.

 

[Pile_O_Gunz]

Dog there is a world of difference between chattel "I have legal title to you and your descendents in perpetuity and can dispose of you as I wish" slavery and "I believe I am underpaid for the work I do".

Debt bondage existed and continues to exist. Most "sweatshops" are not good examples. Many pay worse than what a westerner would get, but provide better work hours, more reliability and similar or better income to subsistence farming, day labor or other viable alternatives.


Mostly women, and mostly for sex. It is a serious issue. Some unfortunate people are tricked into coming to a country for work only to have their passport taken from them so that they can be forced to work in incredibly poor conditions with nil pay ad famously happened in Russia not long ago, but this is a much rarer event.

It's happening here in the UK. Gangs lure them over with the promise of high pay jobs in reality it's low pay agricultural labour where they earn just enough to cover the rent of a room shared with 10 others.

 

[Metz]

War and slavery are not morally the same, not by a long shot. There's a whole thing called 'just war theory'. I have never heard anyone propose a 'just slavery theory'.

How is "killing natives" a "just war"? I guess back then it was justifiable to kill heathens, therefore making it a justifiable action. Same with slavery being justifiable back then. It became a racial issue in the 1550s, but before then you had all sorts of slaves across Europe.

 

[Metz]

The thing about slavery is that it earned money for the African kingdoms so they could buy weapons to expand and defend themselves. For Europeans, slaves made production grow (sugar, tobacco, and cotton) which helped stimulate their economies so as to be able to field large navies and vast armies in all corners of the world. Jamaica in 1776 earned 5x as much as the 13 colonies combines (thanks to Slave labor of course).

 

[Laurent1944]

War and slavery are not morally the same, not by a long shot. There's a whole thing called 'just war theory'. I have never heard anyone propose a 'just slavery theory'.

There were several "just slavery theories": see http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/slavery/ethics/philosophers_1.shtml

And this link does not include the discussions between abolitionnists and slavery partisans in the 18th-19th centuries: much of the latter claimed that slaves' condition was better as they were than if they were free.

Most of the time, the idea behind this was to protect their business interests. As much as the "just war theory" is used for geopolitics reasons (it seems to be far more just to fight a war if there is oil in the area...)

 

[gia257]

they pay worse and? thats the idea, you kept slaves because they were cheaper than the product they helped create, you hire illegal immigrants or keep sweatshops full of kids or whatever because they are cheaper. It is not because you enjoy having slaves, its because you want to be rich.

it doesnt happen only in Russia or only in the UK, it happens everywhere, also just because the news only care about women doesnt mean it only happens rarely to men. I know a case in Brazil, a family member, male, had to seek help from the military once they visited the jungle camp he was stuck in penniless digging wells (they flew him back to his country), he had traveled there as a gold merchant and got robbed. He was only getting paid in food, so he was never going to leave if not for the soldiers.

You heard of those working visa to the US? so not even illegal trouble, you tend to pay to get it, and get sent somewhere in the us that offers jobs for the visa you got, there you get paid the bare minimum to support you and save enough to recover your initial investment.

 

[solidprice]

I want wiping out all of slavery as a africa tech tag before 1700 as a achivement.

It would be a desicion that you would take that would change slaves in all your subjects and your lands.

Yeah a bit snowflake...
But it would be like a slightly less annoying and more fun African power achivement run.

 

[gia257]

I want wiping out all of slavery as a africa tech tag before 1700 as a achivement.

It would be a desicion that you would take that would change slaves in all your subjects and your lands.

Yeah a bit snowflake...
But it would be like a slightly less annoying and more fun African power achivement run.

https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/List_of_decision_lists#Pass_Abolition_of_Slavery_Act
1710
not an achievement though

also given the conditions it woulnt be that challenging, perhaps if you own all the slave provinces you can access it early?, something like own all slave provinces, be a republic, ruled by a dictator, dictator happens to be nationalistic and an early enlightened, abolishes slavery, no one complains or they die.

 

[Sfan]

That's how the topic started gia257, but I agree that an African country could have that as a more interesting decision.

 

[gia257]

Perhaps add being in a disaster (or be 75% progress towards one? theres no mechanic like that yet) and having negative stability, that way you could say the dictator enacted the reform to gather new support and avoid a coup (and throw enslavers under the bus), decision would give a some manpower and reset the disaster progress while raising enslaver revolts, upon defeating them you get back a stab in addition to abolishing slavery, which is pricey for a republic

 

[Laurent1944]

Slavery in game is just a "product". In real life, it was providing the basic manpower to all productive economy in the Western colonies in America, from USA to Brazil, and in some other places too (like Indian Ocean islands).

Abolishing slavery should be a decision available to everybody:
_ if you own slave producing provinces, the provinces change to something else.
_ if you own colonies producing cotton/coffee/etc... you take a malus on production.
_ all countries having abolished slavery will then ignore "slave money" in trade.

And I think abolishing slavery should be added as a goal of war, available to countries having abolished it themselves.

On the other hand, slavery is not something that is dependent from the terrain, like crops or metals, but its is totally a political/economical decision. So in game I would propose that a country may turn his provinces or the ones of his vassals/tributaries to produce slaves.

But it is probably not polically correct to put this in a game. Even an historical one (while it is totally correct to raze the world with a nomad horde or to kill millions of men in wars).

 

[Magnificent Genius]

And I think abolishing slavery should be added as a goal of war,

Even if it was a wargoal, though, why would you do it? You would be far better served by taking the equivalent in WS worth of provinces.

What purpose does it serve?

 

[Laurent1944]

Even if it was a wargoal, though, why would you do it? You would be far better served by taking the equivalent in WS worth of provinces.

What purpose does it serve?

Good question: ask British of the 19th century that sent Royal Navy ships to patrol and cease slave transatlantic trade.

In game terms you can make it an achievement (clean Africa of all slave trafic (something not yet done IRL...), or you can use it to roleplay, or to cripple the economy of a slaver country.

 

[gia257]

Even if it was a wargoal, though, why would you do it? You would be far better served by taking the equivalent in WS worth of provinces.

What purpose does it serve?

for once, has there been a war with abolish slavery cb? all i recall is civil wars (disaster) or self decisions (by the ruler in a "dictatorial" way -regardless of them being dictators or not- and facing the unrest from enslavers, although the ones i know the enslavers had to eat the ire from the slaves and hide/run away, the ruler getting all the support from these free people)

 

[Magnificent Genius]

roleplay, or to cripple the economy of a slaver country.

I guess for roleplay it makes some sense.

The slaver countries economy would be more crippled by taking equivalent WS in provinces from them.

 

[Laurent1944]

Good question. I knew that the Mossi, an African kingdom, actively fought slaver states to stop the trade... before joining it themselves.

I searched for more, and what I found is that a abolish slavery casus belli effectivelly existed in reality, but in the late 19th: it was used to justify European invading African states, officially to stop slave trade or abolish slavery. Of course, it was just a casus belli, taking the land was the real goal, but we also do it in EU4.