4 ms·
USSR used slave workforce in the recent times, and didn't care that much about feeding them. If slaves are cheaply replaceable, economic incentives alone won't
by brokenkebab 6y ago
USSR used slave workforce in the recent times, and didn't care that much about feeding them. If slaves are cheaply replaceable, economic incentives alone won't likely produce any reason for liberation.
- bluGill 6y agoIn general slaves are hard/expensive enough to get that you keep them around. You need to go to war (which can kill your people, or even cause you to lose and become the salve), or buy them from someone else who did that work. Plus you need to teach them to do their work, which means a fair amount of effort if you are just going to starve them. (though this is also why slaves generally were basic manual labor and anything highly skilled). Though you are correct, there have been various concerns for the welfare of the slaves over history, and cost of getting more is a major factor into that.
- ncmncm 6y agoUSSR (well within living memory!) generally preferred to starve its slaves. Prisoners-of-war released back to Russia after WWII were sent to the GULags as deserters -- because how did they survive, without collaborating? One of Socrates's rants on record is deriding an argument that negligence causing your slave to die should be a crime.