Common Questions on Slavery

Common Questions on Slavery

“What would you do if enslaved?/Should you be enslaved?”

These questions rely on a series of misconceptions and prejudicial notions. Within my worldview it’s
the equivelant to asking: “What if you were a prisoner?,” or “What if you were free?” The answer to all
of which is the same: Slavery is appropriate for some, just as much as “freedom” is appropriate for others,
we infer the individuals appropriate position within civilization through how they interact with free society,
not because free society is the apex of existence or an ideal way of living, instead it is the metric because most people
are relatively conformist and have an inclination towards systems they can independently rationalize as
being appropriate for themselves. Given these tendencies within humanity it’s appropriate to give most of
the populace freedom until they betray it, as most will use their freedom, within a morally proper, socially
responsible, a-democratic, authority oriented society, appropriately. The Slaves, within the system of slavery
I posit, would not be perpetual recipients of a wholly irrational, unsound, and violent disdain, but instead
they would be working towards a goal of propriety; if one violates the proscribed norms and edicts of this
system, as would be affirmed by the master and the state, then that slave would be of slave society until
they reformed themselves. If I was under the system I advocated for I would conform to the appropriate
facets of existence within that society in order to faciliate the desired result relating to my role within the
system, per my evaluation. There is nothing necessarily innapropriate about any individual, within certain
pre-assumed societal/legal parameters, being put into the slave system, regardless of the circumstances
of birth, accrued wealth, previous meritorious achievement, or role within the body of the ruling state. If I
found myself as a career criminal with all of the norms, vices, and particulars that generally implies I would
not object to enslavement in pursuit of reform, as to if I should be mandated slavery, per any current non
-hypothetical evaluation the answer is: “No.” I see no aspect of my current conduct that would require
slavery to reform. Slave society is not totalistically necessary and I see no reason that I, or most
of the populace, should be within slave society.

Why do you not advocate for your own enslavement?”

The answer to that question is as coherent and accurate as in answering: “Why do you not advocate
for the readers enslavement?” The answer being: The point of the slave system is not for the control
over every individual regardless of the particulars of the citizen, for that is accomplished by, and is the
role of, the state instead the goal is to give proper instruction and ability to those who have rejected the
morals and edicts of “free society.” I am not in rebellion against those morals edicts, nor are most of those
who currently constitute “free society,” and therefore they should be enabled to demonstrate and actualize
their own variation of virtuous conformity in the pre-constricted ways in which they’d prefer. If I or they ever
did become in perpetual rebellion against those norms through illegality, subversion, or organized dissent
against propriety then slavery would be as appropriate for me or you as it would be the aforementioned
criminal.

“Why can’t I sexually abuse/engage in sexual acts with my slaves?”

The point of slavery is reform; the point is not to satiate or enable sexual desire. Those who ask such
a question demonstrate their own lack of proper sensibilities or pleasures beyond the actualizing of
carnal self interest through the most vulgar expressions of personal fufillment. Inter-reliant civilization
founded and controlled on a basis of collective interest and national concern is as foreign to them as
the concepts would be to rabies infested dog. These moral reprobates are who would be most fitted
for slavery.

Is it slavery if there are restrictions?

Yes. Slavery intrinsically implies ownership, but not necessarily total control; nearly all variants of
historical slavery existed under legal codes and a set of cultural norms, both restraining the master
class from having the ability to actualize total control over their slaves, however this is, near universally,
deemed slavery, why? Because slavery is ownership in man, not the abuse of man, not the extraction
of labor from man, and not the total and complete control over man. We can infer ownership on the
basis of a number of criteria, most frequently it’s legal a title, you own something when the government
grants you ownership over it, just as much as if you own a dog and you give a dog a degree of freedom
does that mean you no longer own the dog? Of course not, and as much is true with slavery. The second
way of classifying ownership is cultural, a cultural relation exists beyond the state and can exist in spite
of the state. To infer who is a slave culturally it’s about the degree of ownership one has, how we infer the
degree of ownership is by analyzing the potential freedom of the individual in the cultural relation of the
master and the slave. A key distinction should be made: You should not infer a state of slavery on the
basis of what the individual is enabled/forced to participate or not participate in, instead you should infer
slavery or freedom on the basis of potential control. A member of slave society can have just as many
technical freedoms as a “freeman,” however if those freedoms can be rescinded or contextualized per
the discretion of the master then they’re not a free man, instead they are a slave who has a number of
priveleges. This is why the notion of slavery is inseperable from government. The state has the potential
for total control over your life and often exercises it, if you are governed you are a slave. This is equally
as true for civilization broadly, as what are your freedoms but incidental democratic will?

Is slavery permanent?

It depends on if the slave lives up to the standards and goals of the society. If they do then after an appropriate
period of time, per demonstrated ability, they’ll be freed. If they do not they’ll be kept within the slave system.
If they’re assigned a minimum period of one year to learn a specific set of skills within the confines of the slave
system, state review following the year period, and they do see they’ll be gradually re-integrated into “free
civilization.” If they are insufficient in performance then they will be mandated a period of time that relates
to their progress within slavery society, the period that they’ll be allotted will be dependent upon the progress
and number of penalties they will have accrued within that period and the severity of the infraction question.

call to chat