Wouldn't it be more efficient if Gobbotopia to emancipate all their slaves?

[paladinofshojo]

I'm just saying, since the state wouldn't have to worry about the cost of feeding and sheltering them. They can still be forced to live under de jure segregation under the heel of the goblinoids and be denied civil liberties...this is evil we're talking about, I don't expect them to go ahead and apologize to the Azurites for keeping them in bondage. It's just more pragmatic to pay them low wages and making them do the low level labor occupations of the nation rather than wasting more resources to force them to do said low level labor occupations.

[Edmundog]

Yes, but still... They are Evil.

[Katana_Geldar]

If they freed all the slaves, what is to stop them from leaving or trying to get equal rights? Besides, Redcloak hates ALL human races, he'd never permit it.

[Pyron]

If they freed all the slaves, what is to stop them from leaving or trying to get equal rights?

Animate Dead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0037.html) - putting a whole new meaning to the phrase 'Give me liberty or give me death'.

[derfenrirwolv]

The slaves would leave and form an army that would be ready to fight on the side of whatever revenge the elves or the Azure city armada have in mind.

[Alex Warlorn]

Slavery isn't about being cost effective (Cause it isn't), it's about STATUS! Slave owners don't give up their slaves because they're a -status symbol- not because they're cost effective.

[Blackdog]

Check what Redcloak said about Cliffport: it was a bargaining chip towards international recognition.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Check what Redcloak said about Cliffport: it was a bargaining chip towards international recognition.
No. It was a stumbling block. Cliffport was holding out specifically because of the slavery. What got Cliffport on Gobbotopia’s side was the elvish resistance. Cliffport still wants to eliminate the slavery, but it’s no longer a deal breaker.

[multilis]

"Slavery isn't about being cost effective (Cause it isn't), it's about STATUS"

Slavery is often cost effective, been shown in many civilizations, have the "real world politics" issue to avoid so harder to give examples.

Put a slave in jail and you pay for his upkeep. Make him part of a chain gang and he pays for his own and then some with labor.

The class above chain gang (semi slavery) has to fear joining chain gang if they behave badly, going on strike, etc. The class above them, "citizens", middle class does your innovation, fights like free people, etc, knowing that they can go down a class if they misbehave too much.

Old, very successful civs like Greeks and Romans used models like this, and variations can be found in more modern as well, not nice, but effective.

[derfenrirwolv]

Slavery makes money for the individual who holds slaves. Much of the cost of slavery, securing runaways, enforcing slave codes, keeping them from reading and learning etc is born by society in the form of police and border patrols. The more slaves there are, the more taxes are put towards maintaining them, but the lower the value of their output becomes, neccesitating obtaining more slaves to make up the difference.

[slayerx]

The slaves would leave and form an army that would be ready to fight on the side of whatever revenge the elves or the Azure city armada have in mind.

I don't think i entirely agree
When it comes down to it, the primary reason the resistance fights and the reason hinjo wants to return is because azurites are still suffering... Once they slaves are free though a lot of the incentive drops. Since they have a new place to settle down, what REAL reason do they have to go after the goblin nation. Before being willfully set free, most slaves feared they would die like that; as such many of these people will not be too eager to go to the frontlines. Really, the only real reason left to attack the goblin nation would be for revenge, and to eliminate evil. But a war with the goblins would have casualties, and as such Hinjo would not be quick to go to war over such reasons.

while the slaves were there he worked to get there as fast as possible... he's already taking action through the elves and probably plans militarize as fast as possible so that he can aid them within a few months... but now that no one is in imminent danger he will want to take his time to help eliminate casualties. Instead of going back within months, he could be looking at more like years... and over this time the goblins can really get a handle on their nation, and possibly even forge alliances that will aid them if they were attacked... the prep time Hinjo uses will also be taken advantage of by the goblins... not to mention they can use the free slaves as a way to tell the international community that they are not evil, which should help their country grow

Soon it may come to war, but if the Azurites do not seem to be gaining some serious ground, many might start to question if the war is worth it... afterall, the goblin nation wouldn't be the first evil nation, and revenge may not seem worth loosing even more lives over it... many citizens might start convincing themselves that its best to the just bare the wounds, cut their losses and move on... but that's my thoughts on how things might work out

[Blackdog]

No. It was a stumbling block. Cliffport was holding out specifically because of the slavery. What got Cliffport on Gobbotopia’s side was the elvish resistance. Cliffport still wants to eliminate the slavery, but it’s no longer a deal breaker.

No reason it couldn't be both. If Cliffport was reluctant to acknowledge the goblin nation (for other reasons) but unwilling to go to war, then the opportunity of ending human slavery there provides an incentive for economic engagement. If Cliffport ends human slavery in Gobbotopia, it likely stands to earn political prestige from other human nations.

[Dr.Epic]

Because emancipation, even if you treat them worse, is still better than slavery and is a step closer to them being equals.

[TheNifty]

Once they slaves are free though a lot of the incentive drops. Since they have a new place to settle down, what REAL reason do they have to go after the goblin nation.

Um... The fact that the goblins invaded their country, took it over & still occupy it, killed a heck of a lot of civilians and enslaved the vast majority for a year?

I mean, wars have been fought over a heck of a lot less than any one of those reasons, and I haven't even brought up that trifling matter of them being integral to a plot to hold the Gods hostage or destroy the world. There's probably tens of thousands of Azurites who now hate goblin-kind to a level we can barely comprehend - they've had family members die in the battle, been enslaved, watched as their fellow citizens were lowered into the snarl, endured incredible amounts of torture...

You really expect them to want peace if they're freed? Maybe, if by "peace" you mean "rivers of goblin blood".

[SoC175]

The freedom of the slaves should be used to bargain for recognition by the other human lands still refusing to recognize gobotopia. It could even be used in negotiations with the AC refugees to be recognized even by them (they just take the elven island as new territoy, recognize that the lost all claims to AC and in turn all remaining slaves are freed and send there)

[TheNifty]

Why would the AC refugees hold to that agreement? Once the slaves were free, they'd be idiots not to retake their city.

[slayerx]

Um... The fact that the goblins invaded their country, took it over & still occupy it, killed a heck of a lot of civilians and enslaved the vast majority for a year?
Wow, way to overlook most of my post...
y'know considering how right after what you quoted i mention that there would still be a desire for vengence and crushing evil... and that my post essentially said that it would lead to war, but further down the line because now their is no one in imminent danger... but both sides would get time to prepare and that the war would end up being to costly to the point where azurites begin to back down.

"you just got freed from slavery; whoops on your first attack on the goblins you were killed. hope you enjoyed your freedom while it lasted"
"I'm sorry to tell you maam, but it seems your only child died trying to avenge your husband and now you are alone..."

If they were to bring an end to the goblin nation with no more than hinjo left standing, will hinjo be pleased with himself? Congrats you avenged the dead, and it only cost the lives of everyone who was still alive... really how many azurites must die, before you decide to move on and live?

It's not called "wanting peace" it's called "Cutting your losses"...


Why would the AC refugees hold to that agreement? Once the slaves were free, they'd be idiots not to retake their city.
After the main army got decimated leaving nothing but untrained civilians, wouldn't that be charging into imminent death? sounds pretty suicidal... Ya brilliant...

[TheNifty]

Wow, way to overlook most of my post...

Sorry, didn't mean to take it out of context.


After the main army got decimated leaving nothing but untrained civilians, wouldn't that be charging into imminent death? sounds pretty suicidal... Ya brilliant...

To get your country back? people in the real world have done way more suicidal things. And lets not forget they'd almost certainly be able to find a lot of allies. I suspect many countries, even ones that have acknowledged Gobbotopia are not happy with the current situation.

[Ryuka Tana]

"I will say, here, that a lot of people would probably think, 'they already killed us, that's just suicidal'... However, let me simply say, desperation and a little guerrilla warfare go a long way... Which is beside my point. Funny thing about people that I will never understand, most people value life over liberty and happiness..."

"In fact, many people would probably tell me, 'Can't really be happy if you're dead...' And you know what I'd say... 'Damn Right! I'll take dead and not happy, over alive and unhappy...' If you have to ask the distinction, well, I would pity you if I pitied people."

"The best examples, however, I can think of, is Columbine or 9/11... No one stepped up to do anything about the people involved in either case. You know why? No one was willing to die... I may sound insensitive, but that, to me, is amusing. I'm a misanthrope, so, loss of life just doesn't really get me down."

"It's not really prudent to the circumstance involved, but to try to make it so, let's say... In a reasonable world society (of which ours is not), emancipation might mitigate damages. I'll tell you what, if you told me I was going to be your slave, I'd tell you 'Yessuh Massah, whatever you say!' I'd be the best little slave ever, for as long as it took to get the other slaves to beat some slave owner ass, or to get an opportunity to kill someone. Even if I would die for it, I'd make a point, and then put it in someone..."

(As an aside, to Nifty, via your signature, LE monk can laugh in the paladins face though. Well, depending on the world and DM and the interpretation of alignment, but I'd say, there's nothing about sex that stops someone from explicitly being a 3E monk <in general, not necessarily in every case>.)

[Turkish Delight]

To get your country back? people in the real world have done way more suicidal things. And lets not forget they'd almost certainly be able to find a lot of allies. I suspect many countries, even ones that have acknowledged Gobbotopia are not happy with the current situation.

If they want to commit mass suicide, they can do that right now. It doesn't sound like a good solution, and most oppressed populations in real life don't choose it either.

The chief danger of a free human population is that they would basically be a fifth column for any 'good' force that sets about liberating the city, incapable of winning the battle on their own but certainly able to undermine the war effort. Besides, I'm pretty sure Xykon would have to give up his Evil Overlord credentials if he didn't enslave the populations he conquers.

[snafu]

Slavery is certainly inefficient. It puts the responsibility for the accommodation, care and feeding of the worker onto the master. What you want to do is employ free men, and pay them only the bare minimum necessary for their survival; that costs you no more, but means that the worker is the one responsible for finding food and shelter - you don't have to arrange it for him. And now the worker does not work for fear of the whip; he works for fear that if he does not, he and his family will surely starve. So much more motivating.

It's been done before. Look up dhimmi, and ghetto.

Then the next thing to do is break up solidarity among the underclass - this leads to revolts among slaves, strikes among exploited workers, and so it is undesirable. You want to reward those who sell out their comrades. Elevate them to positions of authority over other workers; give them more material wealth and comforts, but ensure that they are implicated in the abuse of those not so fortunate, so they are hated and can never go back; then they're yours. In this way you identify and quickly subvert those among the workers who might otherwise become leaders.

Go further, and see to it that multiple tiers exist among the underclass. If all are utterly downtrodden then all are equal, all are together, all are comrades; if on the other hand you establish a class structure inside the underclass itself, then you can turn them against each other, and it is then likely that any class struggle that erupts will not be against your regime, but internal to the underclass, brother against brother. The proletarian uprising will be against those of their own who have betrayed them to feather their own nests - not against the ruling class who engineered the whole situation. And it makees an uprising less likely in the first place; a worker might think 'I have it bad - but at least not as bad as that poor fool!'

It might still be worthwhile retaining a slave class for those extremely dangerous or arduous tasks which are practically equivalent to a death sentence - for instance, searching the sewers for that phylactery - but you don't want to run your whole economy that way. And anyway isn't that what zombies are for?

[hamishspence]

I recall reading that slavery was a big step forward in morality over extermination- since it raised the possibility of slaves bocoming a part of society over time, as opposed to every member of a conquered group, adults and children, being killed.

That said, its not clear at the moment if it will work like that for the new nation- will humans be able to earn their freedom? Will there be human-goblin hybrids who have a high chance of rising in society? And so on.

[Turkish Delight]

Slavery is certainly inefficient. It puts the responsibility for the accommodation, care and feeding of the worker onto the master. What you want to do is employ free men, and pay them only the bare minimum necessary for their survival; that costs you no more, but means that the worker is the one responsible for finding food and shelter - you don't have to arrange it for him. And now the worker does not work for fear of the whip; he works for fear that if he does not, he and his family will surely starve. So much more motivating.

It's been done before. Look up dhimmi, and ghetto.

Then the next thing to do is break up solidarity among the underclass - this leads to revolts among slaves, strikes among exploited workers, and so it is undesirable. You want to reward those who sell out their comrades. Elevate them to positions of authority over other workers; give them more material wealth and comforts, but ensure that they are implicated in the abuse of those not so fortunate, so they are hated and can never go back; then they're yours. In this way you identify and quickly subvert those among the workers who might otherwise become leaders.

Go further, and see to it that multiple tiers exist among the underclass. If all are utterly downtrodden then all are equal, all are together, all are comrades; if on the other hand you establish a class structure inside the underclass itself, then you can turn them against each other, and it is then likely that any class struggle that erupts will not be against your regime, but internal to the underclass, brother against brother. The proletarian uprising will be against those of their own who have betrayed them to feather their own nests - not against the ruling class who engineered the whole situation. And it makees an uprising less likely in the first place; a worker might think 'I have it bad - but at least not as bad as that poor fool!'

It might still be worthwhile retaining a slave class for those extremely dangerous or arduous tasks which are practically equivalent to a death sentence - for instance, searching the sewers for that phylactery - but you don't want to run your whole economy that way. And anyway isn't that what zombies are for?

All of this makes sense, but as someone mentioned above, why bother to feed any of them at all? It would seem to make more sense just to butcher the entire human population and zombify them. Zombies don't need to eat or sleep. They don't need lodging. They don't need wages and you don't have to worry about a rebellion of any sort. Their chief drawback is they're probably not as fast, and they probably stink, but given the enormity of benefits to the process, it's hard to imagine those costs would put an enterprising Evil Overlord off.

If Xykon were aiming for efficiency, he would just kill everyone and be done with it.

[snafu]

Since the nation has been recognised by numerous other states, there will now be diplomatic missions. And trade caravans. These will consist primarily of humans - high-status humans, plus a retinue of assistants, servants, advisors, scribes, eunuchs, houris, what have you. Once the new nation is well established its capital will pretty much always be entertaining foreign human visitors who must be treated well because it's good for business.

So they'll have to tone down the goblin-supremacist ideology, at least around these folk. That probably means having some of the natives as quislings; you know the sort. The well-treated educated slave in smart clothes, who is quite happy with his position because he knows he's far better off than the other poor sods, and who will reassure the foreigners that it's really not as bad as all that.

These would form an elite among the human population, and would probably end up in positions among the new nation's diplomatic corps and in its administration of foreign trade. The same was seen in ancient Rome, where educated Greek slaves often found themselves in positions of great influence. What the long term effects would be I don't know. Assimilation in a human society, but the race barrier here is probably insurmountable. Still, they consider half-orcs etc. to be citizens, so one route to advancement for humans would be to marry into a higher class, and then at least their children would be free citizens.

[snafu]

All of this makes sense, but as someone mentioned above, why bother to feed any of them at all? It would seem to make more sense just to butcher the entire human population and zombify them.

Yeah, I think I remember suggesting that myself some time ago. IIRC, someone pointed out that there's an upper limit on how many zombies a caster can actually support, and it's not enough to sustain the whole population. Pity; it would be an elegant solution to the goblins' Azurite problem.

But then, that kind of behaviour would probably have upset the human nations they were negotiating with at the time; it would have been an insuperable obstacle to diplomatic relations with all but the most evil states, and would probably have led to there being heroes everywhere causing trouble (when you massacre populations en masse and create undead hordes out of the remains, heroes tend to turn up out of nowhere; it's an occupational hazard for the most enthusiastic necromancers). Or possibly even a holy crusade against them. Not that Xykon would care; but then again, Xykon doesn't care about the efficient running of the city either. Slaves, zombies, that's Redcloak's problem, right?

[Asta Kask]

All of this makes sense, but as someone mentioned above, why bother to feed any of them at all? It would seem to make more sense just to butcher the entire human population and zombify them. Zombies don't need to eat or sleep. They don't need lodging. They don't need wages and you don't have to worry about a rebellion of any sort. Their chief drawback is they're probably not as fast, and they probably stink, but given the enormity of benefits to the process, it's hard to imagine those costs would put an enterprising Evil Overlord off.

If Xykon were aiming for efficiency, he would just kill everyone and be done with it.

Perhaps he's running out of black onyx?

[DavidBV]

Do we have a figure of how many slaves are in Azure city?

It may very well happen that they are more than we think. Maybe to all the ones captured in battle, we have to add humans from the Azure City territory that have been brought to the city, so perhaps we're talking about many thousands of humans concentrated there. They could at some point revolt with the help of elves, and be a factor.

[Moglorosh]

To get your country back? people in the real world have done way more suicidal things. And lets not forget they'd almost certainly be able to find a lot of allies. I suspect many countries, even ones that have acknowledged Gobbotopia are not happy with the current situation.

I doubt there would be many countries willing to make an enemy of the force that easily overran the most heavily fortified city we've seen thus far. It didn't really appear that any other city we've been shown had a standing army of any sort.

[hamishspence]

One of the bonus strips in War & XPs points out that to do this, Redcloak had to mobilize 90% of the hobgoblin population.

Given the attitudes toward "monsters" that seem to prevail in Origin, SoD, etc its entirely possible that if he had emancipated the inhabitants immediately, allowing them to leave, before any diplomatic overtures had been made, that the surrounding nations would have united to devastate the conquered Azure City.

[Lamech]

I still believe that Redcloak is going about this all wrong and the pragmatic thing to do would be to grant all the humans complete equality and the full rights of any other goblioniod in azure city. Which of course, means that they are all equally under the command of Redcloak and have the right to help build the new goblin nation. Which is kind of like being a slave, but it sounds a lot better.

[hamishspence]

Problem with that is, equal rights, will probably include the right to leave.

Result- they all leave- and start harassing. Or drumming up support in other nations. The Resistance was bad enough- imagine what it would be like with the whole population behind it.

Which is not to say granting human rights wouldn't help him gain some more moral high ground, and improve attitudes of surrounding nations toward Gobbotopia- but its a fledgling nation- would it have survived its first year if Redcloak had emancipated the population immediately after the invasion?

Because Redcloak has built relations first- granting freedoms becomes safer- and can be used as bargaining chips. That is, if he's willing to set aside his hatred of the Azurite population in favour of continuing to cement relations with the neighbours.

Also- now that the ties are built, if he does release them, and they start to conduct their campaigns from the territory of his neighbours, he can put pressure on them to discourage such activity, saying "allowing terrorists to operate from your territory is not the act of a friendly country"

[SoC175]

Why would the AC refugees hold to that agreement? Once the slaves were free, they'd be idiots not to retake their city. Because they lack the power to retake the city. They were unable to hold a fortified city and that would have been much easier than conquer the same fortified city.

[hamishspence]

Attacking the supply lines, the fields, the original hobgoblin base, would be easier- a bigger nation may be harder to defend against incursions.

[sihnfahl]

will humans be able to earn their freedom?
Of COURSE they can earn their freedom. It's just that the bar to earn their freedom will be so high that relatively few will be able to afford the cost...

But at least it's enshrined in law that they can earn their freedom, right?

[paladinofshojo]

Then the next thing to do is break up solidarity among the underclass - this leads to revolts among slaves, strikes among exploited workers, and so it is undesirable. You want to reward those who sell out their comrades. Elevate them to positions of authority over other workers; give them more material wealth and comforts, but ensure that they are implicated in the abuse of those not so fortunate, so they are hated and can never go back; then they're yours. In this way you identify and quickly subvert those among the workers who might otherwise become leaders.

Go further, and see to it that multiple tiers exist among the underclass. If all are utterly downtrodden then all are equal, all are together, all are comrades; if on the other hand you establish a class structure inside the underclass itself, then you can turn them against each other, and it is then likely that any class struggle that erupts will not be against your regime, but internal to the underclass, brother against brother. The proletarian uprising will be against those of their own who have betrayed them to feather their own nests - not against the ruling class who engineered the whole situation. And it makees an uprising less likely in the first place; a worker might think 'I have it bad - but at least not as bad as that poor fool!'



My friend, you just summarized European colonialism and imperialism, still it would be interesting to have human characters show up who actually like the goblin rule (other than the necropheliac thurge) and become traitors to their race and motherland

[Gift Jeraff]

...watched as their fellow citizens were lowered into the snarl...
Just thought I'd nitpick and point out that no one has ever been Snarl'd by Redcloak--for starters it doesn't even seem to be there anymore, and Word of God says that Redcloak isn't evil enough to unmake someone for no reason at all.

[OskarderDrachen]

Why would the AC refugees hold to that agreement? Once the slaves were free, they'd be idiots not to retake their city.

Slaves are equally "free" to retake the the city. Lots of slave uprisings in history. Much better to hold them until there is a really good reason for lifiting the Enforced yoke and replace it with a semi-voluntary one.

[OskarderDrachen]

My friend, you just summarized European colonialism and imperialism, still it would be interesting to have human characters show up who actually like the goblin rule (other than the necropheliac thurge) and become traitors to their race and motherland

There is always the Overseer who crops up in the plot of any slaveholding nation. Still a slave, but a slave with Power over other slaves. Not liked by many people, but that doesn't figure in their (overseer's) mental framework as worth much. Fear is as valued as Respect, and are mostly indistinguishable.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff of Moddingham: Real world politics is an inappropriate topic in this forum. The only way to answer the OPs question, it seems, is with real world analogues.