Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Logan Fyreite]

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Vitoxin

Regarding the use of Vitoxin:
Most slaves in the Empire are controlled simply by violence or the threat of such. Overseers constantly patrol slave populations, making sure they are doing work and not misbehaving. Slaves who are not doing as they should may be beaten, isolated, denied sufficient or high quality food and water, or punished in some other methods. However, some slave populations, such as those working on space ships or in dangerous mining colonies, or particularly troublesome and rebellious slaves, require more stringent methods.

I'd recommend reading the first reference pretty thoroughly as it discussed a great deal about slavery in every nation (not just the Empire) and has cited references to its information.

I'm re-reading the Amarr history on slavery, but honestly there is no mention either way of the separation between abuse and cruelty and what the Amarr consider punishment and acceptable cruelty.

For instance in the Vitoxin article that you provided it says "Most slaves in the Empire are controlled simply by violence or the threat of such... Slaves who are not going as they should may be beaten, Isolated, denied sufficient or high quality food and water... some slave populations[high risk or troublesome]...require more stringent methods."

Most implies a majority, so from that I can infer that a majority of slaves are controlled by the use or threat of violence, including beating, isolation, and starvation, all methods that I would consider "Mistreatment" on some level, especially any combination of the three. The Amarr likely view these mistreatments as "warranted" to control their slaves, this doesn't seem to make it not "mistreatment" from an outside culture's viewpoint. I get that the Amarr wouldn't see it as such, but it's still mistreatment.

Re-reading the slavery bit,
"Proper slavery did not appear until the beginning of the Reclaiming in 20078 AD[1]. The Udorian presence on Amarr Island allowed many of the Empire's peasants the opportunity to leave for a much less restrictive society. The Emperor at the time, fearing the threat of the Udorians, declared them heretics and ordered an entire merchant fleet seized by his army. The Udorian traders, unprepared for this, were captured nearly to the man."

This was the start of slavery and then it was added to the scriptures later as a religious mandate, there's not really much talk about how the slaves are kept other than they are treated depending on how well they convert to the Amarr religion or become useful to their holders. I'm not really seeing the statement that the amarr treat their slaves well in some manner, other than they are expected to indoctrinate them into the Amarr faith. Means of doing that aren't defined.

[ArtOfLight]

I never said the Amarr treat their slaves well.

I said that the idea that the Amarr constantly abuse them and regularly engage in sexual abuse, slaying of children, vitoxin poisoning or whatever other atrocities people like to play up isn't a factually based idea.

Slavery isn't pretty, it isn't meant to be.

What I AM saying is that there are several statements that indicate that there are expectations on how to treat slaves. The Amarr don't take pleasure in the suffering of slaves. The Amarr slavers are watched by the clergy to ensure that they aren't mistreated. Yes, the standards of mistreatment may vary but the fact is that the Amarr are not the horrible, inhumane monsters that everyone wants to make them out to be.

[Casiella]

I believe you assume (and this might be due to misrepresentation on my part) that I want to try and suggest that mistreatment never happens. That is not at all the case.

My problem stems from the fact that the RP community, as a whole, has highlighted all the mistreatment, abuse and ugliness that happens in slavery and brought it to the forefront so that it seems like it's this rampantly spread, extremely common occurrence - which it's not.

No, this is what you said. Which is what Logan refuted. You added those specifics post hoc.

[ArtOfLight]

I never stated it never happens, not once in my entire post.

I said that it does happen but it's not this overwhelming majority that people play it up to be. The Amarr do have expectations and regulations on it, to deny that is a fallacy. Just because I do not directly state that mistreatment happens doesn't mean I've denied that it does, my argument is that it's extremely overplayed and escalated well beyond what is apparently intended by the PF.

[Louella Dougans]

beating a slave reflects poorly upon the Holder, as it shows that they lack the skill to instil proper Amarr virtues in the slave.

[Logan Fyreite]

Second, PF touches upon slave mistreatment and abuse in the Empire (and the Kingdom) but it also makes it quite clear that it's a minority, not a majority and that the Empire actually looks unfavorably on it. Vitoxin is used on less than 10% of total slaves and most of those are ship-crew slaves. Slave abuse seldom happens because if it gets out that a Holder is mistreating their slaves, the constant power struggles between nobles would shift when other nobles brought it to light and caused that Holder to lose favor with the throne and church. The Amarr DO believe in ethics and morality and DO have expectations on how to treat their slaves.

Then you run into the Amarr players that just want to be mustache-twirling evil slavers. The kind who abuse their own "slaves," or constantly make it a point to reference beating, torturing or otherwise harming their "slaves."

hmm

I never said the Amarr treat their slaves well.

Okay then its just a matter of me taking your words differently than intended. Your first post seems to me to say that mistreatment as you define by both sexual as well as physical violence doesn't happen. or is rather uncommon. I'm simply pointing out that physical violence is not uncommon, but that it happens to the majority of Amarr slaves. It's not an uncreditable leap to assume that the overseer's who wander freely amongst the slaves would not partake in sexual abuse as well as physical. I doubt rape would be high on their list visavi the idea that they wouldn't want a bunch of overseer bastards running around, but there are a lot of other "kinds" of sexual abuse.

As a slave, even with supposed places the slave could go to report the "infraction" against them, or others, would reporting those things be in their best interests, doubtful, so they likely do not get reported.

Now don't take this as all Amarr are "mustache-twirling evil slavers." I mean this in that Amarr slaveholders, in the majority, physically, mentally, and most likely (to some extent) sexually abuse their slaves as a matter of course. Perhaps not the Holders themselves, but duly appointed representatives of the Holders.

There's also little evidence to suggest that the Amarr do not regularly engage in sexual abuse, brutal beatings, etc. I'd agree that slaying of children would be ridiculous, but removing or threatening to remove children from their slave families and placed/placing them into Amarr re-education farms, for sure that happens. As our own history has shown us that is the best way to systematically remove cultures from our planet.

What I AM saying is that there are several statements that indicate that there are expectations on how to treat slaves. The Amarr don't take pleasure in the suffering of slaves. The Amarr slavers are watched by the clergy to ensure that they aren't mistreated. Yes, the standards of mistreatment may vary but the fact is that the Amarr are not the horrible, inhumane monsters that everyone wants to make them out to be.

You edited that last bit in there on me as I was responding... Cool that "insert quote" grabbed it.

Anyways, I see evidence of expectations, but then no solid proof of what exactly the expectations are. Amarr "shouldn't" take pleasure in suffering of slaves. That doesn't mean that some do/some do not. Or how rigidly the standards are upheld, there was a case of an entire freighter-full of slaves dying Standards of mistreatment even in varying degree's allows the use of physical and mental torture to control their slaves.

Slavery as a practice is fairly inhumane to me(OOC) Logan (IC, as a former angel cartel slave), making the use of it pretty inhumane/mistreatment heavy idea and practice. Defending it as "not that bad" seems hard for me to believe IC or OOC.

beating a slave reflects poorly upon the Holder, as it shows that they lack the skill to instil proper Amarr virtues in the slave.

Where does it state this and how does that reflect against how the majority of 'Amarr' slaves are controlled via the use of the threat of Physical/mental abuse and or violence. I haven't seen any indication of this in the PF, that's the bit I am still looking for, thanks Louella

[Logan Fyreite]

I never stated it never happens, not once in my entire post.

I said that it does happen but it's not this overwhelming majority that people play it up to be. The Amarr do have expectations and regulations on it, to deny that is a fallacy. Just because I do not directly state that mistreatment happens doesn't mean I've denied that it does, my argument is that it's extremely overplayed and escalated well beyond what is apparently intended by the PF.

I guess that depends on what you have been exposed to in terms of what people are claiming. The majority of claims I have heard IC through Logan's interactions as well as my alts, seem pretty likely. I'm also not sure what you define as "overwhelming majority." I think that the use of the word "most" seems to indicate a majority of slaves is controlled by what I and -I hope- most people in this generation would label as 'mistreatment.'

Slavery isn't nice and isn't supposed to be, in this you are correct, 'mistreatment' of a slave is part of them being a slave, being defined as less than a full human by some perceived inequity that only suffering and pain, if anything, can change. I find it fallacious to attempt to categorize 'slavery' as overplayed, and escalated well beyond what is [subjectively]apparently intended by the PF.

[Louella Dougans]

beating a slave reflects poorly upon the Holder, as it shows that they lack the skill to instil proper Amarr virtues in the slave.

Where does it state this and how does that reflect against how the majority of 'Amarr' slaves are controlled via the use of the threat of Physical/mental abuse and or violence. I haven't seen any indication of this in the PF, that's the bit I am still looking for, thanks Louella

Not sure if it is stated explicitly, but I believe it is reasonable extension of a bit in an article about slaves.

aha:
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Slavery#Holders
"a Holder who never frees his slaves and mistreats them will be viewed negatively by his fellows and the religious authorities."
also:
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Slavery#Societal_View
"A group known as liberal Holders tends to give their slaves far more leeway and eschew more extreme methods of punishment. More conservative elements in the Empire often frown on liberals as coddling slaves and thus stunting their spiritual development."
may be relevant.

So, at the church ice cream social, the liberal holder ladies gossip with each other saying things such as:
"Did you hear about Lord Evil ? A Speaker of Truth told him off for beating a slave! an actual Speaker of Truth!"
"My goodness. I knew he beat his slaves a lot, he is such an uncouth fellow, you have to wonder at the previous Lord's choice in naming him the heir. Best of a bad lot, perhaps?"

[Logan Fyreite]

I read those references as well, but it doesn't define what "Mistreatment" is. Obviously the bar is pretty low if the most common method of slave control is physical and mental abuse.

Also wouldn't the 'liberal' Holders tend to be in the minority, and what is their definition of more leeway?

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Slavery#Methods_of_Control

Goes through the Methods of control and thanks CCP since that seems to indicate that Vitoxin as a control method was much more wide-spread than 10%, and now that insorum is an effective counter to that, they are going back to slave-collars.

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Slavery#Justification

"Those enslaved are expected to toil and suffer until they have purged themselves of the sins that caused their ancestors to be cast down."

Sure, there are indications that pious slaves can be treated much better than rebellious ones, and slave children with any possible skill are also treated well and even sent to Amarr schools, but I don't think it's the "norm" to be treated so nicely.

[lallara zhuul]

There is a E-ON chronicle about soft slave controlling methods.

Mainly through cultural manipulation through integration of stories into the slave population that encourage certain kinds of behaviour.

[ArtOfLight]

Vitoxin was a popular (and remains a popular) use of control for rebellious slaves and slaves in dangerous areas like mines and space ships. It remains a low number in the greater whole.

It doesn't matter though, I apologize for stepping into the conversation. Apparently no amount of arguing is going to change the consensus that the Amarr are just evil bastards who take whatever liberties they want with their slaves despite any number of indications otherwise. Carry on.

[Louella Dougans]

I don't know.

It just seems rather contradictory to me, to have slaves as being cheap enough that beatings and gratuitous deaths are commonplace, and at the same time, expensive enough that fleets of warships are profitably deployed to seize a few thousand individuals.

but contradictions are everywhere in the PF. :\

[Logan Fyreite]

Vitoxin was a popular (and remains a popular) use of control for rebellious slaves and slaves in dangerous areas like mines and space ships. It remains a low number in the greater whole.

It doesn't matter though, I apologize for stepping into the conversation. Apparently no amount of arguing is going to change the consensus that the Amarr are just evil bastards who take whatever liberties they want with their slaves despite any number of indications otherwise. Carry on.

"In recent years, the most popular form of slave control has been the Vitoc method. The Vitoc method involves two steps. First, a slave is infected with a viral agent known as Vitoxin. Next, the slave is given a drug known as Vitoc. Vitoc not only staves off the multitude of physical effects of Vitoxin, it also induces mild euphoria. In this way, slaves can come to regard the Vitoc as a reward rather than a method of control.

This method was widely used by the time of the Elder War, which led to widespread chaos when Insorum, a permanent cure to Vitoxin, was deployed over slave worlds. The slaves, freed of their addiction, rebelled and joined the invaders against the Amarr."

Is what I was referring to re: vitoxin PF inconsistencies. According to that, it seems like some greater percentage of the slave population was in need of insorum to free them of their Vitoc anti-virus addiction.

ArtOfLight, you are clearly bowing out of this conversation, but I won't let you go so easily because your parting shot indicates that "Any number of indications" are present. I've asked for you to show them to me and thus far we haven't been able to agree on one. Am I still misunderstanding your baseline point? Are you just saying that not every slave is poorly treated (a point I agree on) or are you saying that the majority of slaves are not poorly treated (a point I do not agree on and have given my reasons in PF and OOC reasons why I don't agree)?

Amarr are not JUST evil slavers, that's terribly black and white for a many shades of grey universe. However, I think they do have slavers and holders who fit that evil bill, and that their elite caste's treatment of slaves is cruel and some form of "Mistreatment" by our standards. Anyways, disregard if you will. Thanks for the links to some useful information and the good discussion.

I don't know.

It just seems rather contradictory to me, to have slaves as being cheap enough that beatings and gratuitous deaths are commonplace, and at the same time, expensive enough that fleets of warships are profitably deployed to seize a few thousand individuals.

but contradictions are everywhere in the PF. :\

Never mentioned gratuitous deaths, just that violence or force, or the implication of such actions are used to keep slaves in line, and that these things are what I would consider "mistreatment" of slaves. Think the money that using a slave to do labor saves, not to mention the religious significance of bringing another soul or group of souls to the faith, that alone gives each slave enough worth to send warships to be sent to task. vOv

You are correct, contradictions in PF all over the place. Just trying to discuss.

[Casiella]

I don't find much support for the idea that Holders sexually abuse their slaves, myself. (I don't doubt that it happens, but we lack evidence that it happens a lot.)

The evidence that they beat them, starve them, and "mistreat" them in other ways to install discipline is pretty overwhelming, though, particularly in the not-so-liberal parts of the Empire. If it were normal never to do that, then they wouldn't be "liberal" but "centrist" or whatever.

[lallara zhuul]

There seems to be some intuitive leap here from violence and coercion to abuse.

That line would not be crossed if the motives of the dominant party are 'pure'.

The line would not be crossed because of one main reason, the cultural indoctrination that the Amarrians have gone through.

If the religion and the culture make mistreatment of slaves something that is frowned upon then it is not practiced.

Also there is one issue that has not really been touched in the PF, the actual mechanics of penance for sins.

The whole Amarrian culture is tiered because of its feudal nature, why would not the slaves be tiered in a similar manner.
Why would not there be certain sets of rules set for this hierarchy within the hierarchy that is the Empire.

Instead of using a wide brush to paint all slavery with the same colour, shouldn't we as a community start entertaining different methods of finding a way out of the black and white morality that is imposed on us by our OOC views and perhaps start thinking about ways of finding common ground on how to find the different shades of grey within the complex world that is in New Eden.

For me as an Amarrian roleplayer this part of the issue has been simple.

The more you have done penance, the more human you are.
The less human you are, the more stern you have to be in your admonishments.

The perverse thing about the Amarrian Faith is that the cruelty of the punishment stems from the concern for the immortal soul of the person who is being punished.
If they do not repent, they are lost.
There is a very good Scripture snippet about a person that has turned away from God the second time and thus being unredeemable.
All the heathens have turned away from God once, the second time cannot be allowed if there is any chance of them being saved.

Another of the main reasons that mix this issue and makes it quite different from any slavery is in real life.

It is not about money.

It is about religion, not in the way it was during the crusades, not in the way it was mixed in politics since that.

It is all about religion.