Print

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

[Nicoletta Mithra]

However, the Caldari also consider the affairs of other nations their own business, as long as it does no direct harm to the State. As a result, the Caldari find no difficulty in being allied with the Amarr Empire and Khanid Kingdom. They may believe those nations would serve as better trading partners should they abolish slavery, but they wouldn't presume to meddle with their society.

So yes, the Caldari think its up to the Amarr and Khanid whether or not they keep slaves; but no, they also think slavery is economy inefficient in those places as well.

Sure, and it is from their point of view, for the Caldari economy/trade. Doesn't mean that a Caldari economist hired to assess the economy of the Empire would say that it'd be good for the Empire to abolish slavery, if he really tries to do a good job rather than pushing Caldari trade interests.

[Ciarente]

She might well, since "the Caldari view slavery as a misguided notion that does more harm to an economy (and thus a proper society) than good."

An economy, not 'the Caldari economy'.

Amarr characters, and individual Caldari characters for that matter, might very well have their own views on the role of slavery in the Amarr economy. However, there is PF support for Caldari characters believing that slavery is bad for economies in general, regardless of the simultaneous view that the Amarr have the right to be inefficient if they want to. 

[Desiderya]

Isn't the amarrian model of slavery not focused on economical but on spiritual/ideological reasons?

On the topic of Caldari views, let me quote le PF.

While they understand slaves provide ostensibly free labor, they also realize that a slave owner needs to feed, house, and clothe his slaves. Additionally, though slaves can produce items of value, they are unable to purchase anything and thus cannot contribute to a healthy economy.

Prior to summoning up evelopedia this'd be the line of thinking I'd use to construct an argument why slavery is not the best choice economically. Borderline cases such as POWs or criminals aside (Those have to be fed anyway) it largely depends on quite another question:

Do you want to integrate the current slave population into the society. Slavery might as well be a tool of (racial/cultural) separation.
This, combined with the spiritual reasons and the view of slavery as a burden to holders might explain more than an economical analysis.

[Ciarente]

This, combined with the spiritual reasons and the view of slavery as a burden to holders might explain more than an economical analysis.

Absolutely. In fact, if I met one of my Caldari characters I'd probably tell them they were doingitwrong for viewing slavery in the Empire through an economic lens.

[lallara zhuul]

All right, lets put it this way, Liberal Amarrians think that slavery is economically inefficient.

It has been used in debate between Amarrians, between non-Amarrians and just about anybody who has a chip on their shoulder about slavery that does not want to actually do anything about it.

Freedom Fighters, they do not debate, they just raid the Empire for slaves and free them.

I think it is the actions more than opinions that make any difference, in real life and in New Eden.

Boycott Amarrian goods and trade if you do not want to have anything to do with slavery.

Do something.

Talking about it is just about as inefficient as talking about how someone else thinks it is inefficient.

This thread is hilarious.

[Lyn Farel]

Well that still remains the Caldari point of view of the effect of slavery on any economy, whatever is written in PF.

Not an universal truth on the matter.

[Jev North]

Not an universal truth on the matter.

Argh.

Alright, one last attempt at arguing this: empirically. Think of all the places and circumstances where slave or coerced labor occurred in history, then think about where they are now.

[Ciarente]

Well that still remains the Caldari point of view of the effect of slavery on any economy, whatever is written in PF.

Not an universal truth on the matter.

There are a few different discussions going on in this thread and you've raised a few different questions so let me summarize the answers.

1) Why do players (not characters) use as a fact the argument that slavery is economically inefficient? 
Answer: Because it is the consensus of economists, for a range of reasons discussed in this thread including lower economic growth due to lower consumption, lower labor quality, and lack of labor flexibility, that with certain very limited exceptions, slavery is economically inefficient.

2) Why do Caldari think slavery is inefficient?
Answer: Because PF tells us they do. Characters may use arguments developed by real world economists to support and develop that argument (just as characters use arguments developed by real world political scientists in debates over democracy, and real world religious scholars over the importance of faith) but ultimately, the authority for the Caldari in general  thinking slavery is economically inefficient is the PF. 

3) Do the Caldari think slavery is economically inefficient in the Amarr Empire?
Answer: PF tells us that yes, they do.

4) Do the Caldari think the Amarr should stop using slavery?
Answer: The Caldari don't think it's their business. They do think the Amarr would be better trading partners without slavery, so they may think in a general way that it would be good if slavery in the Empire ended, but they're not about to collectively tell the Amarr to cut it out. Individual Caldari characters, however, may be more pushy about it, as individuals.

5) Is slavery inefficient in the Amarr Empire?
Answer: Unclear. PF itself is contradictory, as comments about educated and compliant slaves (untrained and non-compliant labor being one of the great inefficiencies in slavery) are balanced by other references to this being an exception. We do not know enough about the Amarr Empire to know if they have solved all the various issues that make slavery economically inefficient. The Caldari, their allies, don't think they have, according to PF.

6) Does that mean the Amarr Empire are idiots for sticking with slavery/ do I have to find a way for slavery to be efficient for my character to not be an idiot for supporting it?
Answer: No. Slavery is a complex social (and in the Empire, religious) institution that, in human history, has generally not been used or supported for purely economic grounds, but for a range of complex motivations. Slavery obviously works well enough for the Empire not to be a banana republic, economically.

[Lyn Farel]

Not an universal truth on the matter.

Argh.

Alright, one last attempt at arguing this: empirically. Think of all the places and circumstances where slave or coerced labor occurred in history, then think about where they are now.

Because western ethics have evolved ?

And our own countries practiced it too, and where they are now is where we are now, no ?

[Esna Pitoojee]

(THREAD-SUMMARIZING POST HERE)

This may need to be stickied.

[Lyn Farel]

Well that still remains the Caldari point of view of the effect of slavery on any economy, whatever is written in PF.

Not an universal truth on the matter.

There are a few different discussions going on in this thread and you've raised a few different questions so let me summarize the answers.

1) Why do players (not characters) use as a fact the argument that slavery is economically inefficient? 
Answer: Because it is the consensus of economists, for a range of reasons discussed in this thread including lower economic growth due to lower consumption, lower labor quality, and lack of labor flexibility, that with certain very limited exceptions, slavery is economically inefficient.

2) Why do Caldari think slavery is inefficient?
Answer: Because PF tells us they do. Characters may use arguments developed by real world economists to support and develop that argument (just as characters use arguments developed by real world political scientists in debates over democracy, and real world religious scholars over the importance of faith) but ultimately, the authority for the Caldari in general  thinking slavery is economically inefficient is the PF. 

3) Do the Caldari think slavery is economically inefficient in the Amarr Empire?
Answer: PF tells us that yes, they do.

4) Do the Caldari think the Amarr should stop using slavery?
Answer: The Caldari don't think it's their business. They do think the Amarr would be better trading partners without slavery, so they may think in a general way that it would be good if slavery in the Empire ended, but they're not about to collectively tell the Amarr to cut it out. Individual Caldari characters, however, may be more pushy about it, as individuals.

5) Is slavery inefficient in the Amarr Empire?
Answer: Unclear. PF itself is contradictory, as comments about educated and compliant slaves (untrained and non-compliant labor being one of the great inefficiencies in slavery) are balanced by other references to this being an exception. We do not know enough about the Amarr Empire to know if they have solved all the various issues that make slavery economically inefficient. The Caldari, their allies, don't think they have, according to PF.

6) Does that mean the Amarr Empire are idiots for sticking with slavery/ do I have to find a way for slavery to be efficient for my character to not be an idiot for supporting it?
Answer: No. Slavery is a complex social (and in the Empire, religious) institution that, in human history, has generally not been used or supported for purely economic grounds, but for a range of complex motivations. Slavery obviously works well enough for the Empire not to be a banana republic, economically.

1) Wait... The consensus of economists ? Uh, ok, then.

2) Well yes, but that's not an answer in itself. It was the main purpose behind opening that thread in the first place, to try to understand why the Caldari would consider it as such. A lot of good points have been brought up to back that up and I got it more clear now.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

What I'm trying to say is that even if a Caldari would not see the Empire's economy as sitting on a global peak in regard to efficency, they might still acknowledge that it's a local peak on which the Empire is practically stuck, as investment costs to change to another economic system are too high.

Also, of course an Caldari sees all other econo-politcal systems as less efficent than their own.

Now onto another thing:

As I was not quite convinced by the appeal to authority in 1), nor by the arguments given that slavery is economically inefficent I did a quick search with google scholar. Since the article 'The Economics of Slavery in the Ante Bellum South' by  Conrad & Meyer and especially the book 'Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery.' by Fogel & Engerman, which both employ econometrics to the question and conclude that slavery in the US south was efficient, were published, there is, as far as I was able to see, no consensus on the economic efficiency of slavery in the economic sciences.

To me it appears, after skimming through a lot of articles on the topic, that there are conditions under which slavery is economically efficient (land is abundant, labor is scarce, labor done is is relatively simple and thus easy to supervise) and others under which it is not. I think there are good reasons to assume that the radical move away from slavery that we see in western societies and thinking is a cultural achievement of progressing ethics, rather than the result of economic necessities.

[Samira Kernher]

Economy of the Amarr Empire

Something to read if people haven't yet.

Some important notes from it:

"The Empire utilizes minimal automation in harvesting, which makes it less efficient than the other empires."

"In some senses, this is a self-fulfilling cycle, as more slaves mean more needs, which means more work must be done, which means more slaves are needed. This, as well as a perceived inefficiency in utilizing manual labor over extensive automation, has led to criticism of the slavery industry from a purely economic standpoint, especially from the Caldari State. Ignoring the social and religious implications, the Amarr often respond that adjusting a process which has worked for millennia would have massive costs which could potentially crash the Imperial economy entirely."

So it does seem to be primarily a matter of modern machinery. While slaves are trained to use machines and it's not a complete 'picking by hand' workforce (as stated in the Slavery article), it's still more "backwards" and labor-intensive than the other empires.

[Lyn Farel]

Slaves spend the majority of their days tending and harvesting crops, plowing fields, and eliminating pests. Contrary to the popular image, not all of these tasks are done by hand. While certain crops do require manual harvesting, many tasks are performed by slaves utilizing machines.

PF somewhat contradicts itself at least a little on this.

I can very well imagine that their machines and automation are less efficient, but make up your mind, manual labor or slaves utilizing machines ? :/

[Samira Kernher]

I don't think it really contradicts at all. It's not binary.

Slaves use machines. But those machines are not state of the art, or rather they do not use the level of automation that machines do in other empires. Therefore, in comparison to the other empires, the slaves do more hands-on, inefficient work.

In other words, it is the machines that require hands-on attention. If the Caldari or the Gallente have, say, a drone tractor, while the Empire has a slave-driven tractor, then the Imperial tractor is more labor-intensive. The use of machines lowers the amount of labor needed, but the degree of lowering varies widely.

In fact, consider the differences between Amarrian and Caldari crews. In this area, the idea is completely reversed. Caldari crews are more labor-intensive, because they do not use the same amount of automation as the Amarr ships do. And the Gallente use even more than both. Therefore, Caldari ships are, crew-wise, more inefficient than the ships of other empires, even if their ships are otherwise more advanced.

Slaves use agricultural machines, rather than hand-picking, but those machines are designed to be micro-managed by a user, whereas in, say, the State, the machine is designed to run largely on its own.