Can an empire be built without slaves?

[Twalli]

I guess one could argue that it can, but history hasn't shown it. Every single empire I've studied has had slavery.

Yes

No

I don't know

[KostasKouvalis]

The issue with that is, it's not that they were incapable of doing it without slaves, they were just too lazy, too greedy and too egoistical.

If they hired their own people to do it, they would have to pay them and those finances could be better used for other things, so why not cut costs where you can? But supremacist mentality also plays a factor. You think someone who was capable of brainstorming a thriving empire is gonna degrade themselves by doing manual labor? No. They're gonna want high level positions, and they believe manual labor should be left to those who are stupid and have no ambitions for anything.

A great modern example is the Persian Gulf States. The locals work high end respectable careers such a doctors, engineers, lawyers and teachers and leave jobs like cab driving, cooking and construction to South Asians which they view as "third world trash."

It's the same concept with empires, regardless of race. The people who founded the empires viewed the people they enslaved as inferior trash, who's place was to serve them. So it's not that they couldn't do those jobs the slaves did themselves, it's just that they didn't want to stoop to that level.

[KostasKouvalis]

They thought they were too good for manual labor so they got people they viewed as inferior and unworthy of equal treatment to do it for them.

[MrOracle]

Not only are you correct, but this is quite literally the EXACT SAME mentality that modern global elites have towards the general population, IN PARTICULAR the middle class, whom they despise. It's exactly what the World Economic Forum talks about at every meeting.

Currently, the thinking at the WEF is that the world is vastly overpopulated, and that they feel that they can maintain their ultra-luxury lifestyle with only half a billion people worldwide to do all of the work to maintain it. That's 1/16th of the current global population - and so they are determined to reduce the population of the Earth to that level as quickly as possible, and one of the many ways they are going this is by encouraging 1st World middle class NOT to have relationships or marriages and definitely not have kids. This will then shrink the population of the people who are intelligent and who have some resources, so that, eventually, they have no power and can be made into slaves with a minimum of resistance.

As much as that might sound like some conspiracy theory, it isn't. The WEF makes their lectures (as dry and boring as they are presented) available online, and while the presentation is boring, the matters being discussed are hugely alarming, and their attitudes towards average people is terrifying.

[KostasKouvalis]

@MrOracle That's something similar to what happened in the Mayan Empire. The intelligent Mayans were slowly wiped out and only the stupid Mayans were left, and it's modern day Meso-Americans that are the descendants of these stupid Mayans.
Our own Mexican tour guide was telling us this.

[KostasKouvalis]

Remember how Pol Pot exterminated all the smart people and only left stupid peasants? So your "conspiracy theory" isn't that far fetched

[MrOracle]

Well, that's because once power is consolidated into the hands of so few, you quickly have a race of "most brutal to your competitors wins" and you end up with a totalitarian dictator, who immediately has anyone who could remotely be a threat to his power (including most of his own supporters) killed. Only weak "yes men" are allowed to live - men who are happier being slaves who might occasionally get a few table scraps for being good slaves.

These regimes never last all that long historically - look at North Korea, where the country really is falling apart right now, not that it has far to fall. I'm not sure we'll see another generation of leader there.

[KostasKouvalis]

@MrOracle Yeah, if we start talking about every example, we'll be here all night, but you practically summed it up. And their gigantic egos won't let them acknowledge their own incompetence. They want to have their cake and eat it too.
Look what's happening to the U. S. and other Western countries. People are being stupified, because like you said, stupid people are easy to control. And in southern African countries they're replacing intelligent Whites with stupid blacks.

[KostasKouvalis]

If people don't wake up, Western society will collapse

[MrOracle]

Most people are blind, deaf, and dumb, and are walking in the chute towards the barn, where strange noises are coming from, but are sure everything is going to be just fine...

[KostasKouvalis]

@MrOracle Tucker Carlson once said straight up, that when the U. S. needed people for dirty jobs, they took immigrants, now they have no need for immigrants.
I also like this quote from Jimmy Carr about Irish people, "Fuck off, road's done!"
So not much has really changed, aside from we now have to pay their workers, though some don't

[strateguy632]

of course it can, the only examples were just from when slave was considered a valid option. but not anymore!

look at the empire called nato' that america built n leads 40 countries.

also America's Indo-Pacific Alliance! another 20 countries, all achieved without slavery. a huge empire leading many strong nations.

[Twalli]

We had slavery for 87 years. That helped nuke a strong foundation.

[Twalli]

*make

[DaisyM23]

Technically yes, all empires we know of did have some form of slavery but they all used it differently, for some they probably could've still built their empires without slaves - the Mongols probably could've but the British couldn't because they helped facilitate a whole INSTITUTION of slavery whilst before this, slavery was seen as just a consequence of war and conquest

[KostasKouvalis]

I think the British could have too, they just didn't want to for the reasons I mentioned in MY post. Interestingly enough, the UK was the first nation to abolish slavery

[Twalli]

@KostasKouvalis They actually did lite abolition. They forbade Beitisj ships from carrying slaves, but did not abolish the institution until later.

[DaisyM23]

@KostasKouvalis i don't think the British emprie would have prospered as it did without slavery, the slave trade kinda drove the industrial revolution which allowed britain to become the most powerful country for years - and even though they abolished the TRADE they didn't abolish slavery itself for a while after, and slavery obviously still continued, they kind of worked for both sides putting their own economic interests first

[Twalli]

I know which os why I said lite abolition because slavery still legal and foreign ships could still take slaves there for sale.

[Friendlybro79]

In today's times yes. The past doesn't always indicate what is possible for the future. Also I can't speak for 1000 years ago because I wasn't there. We've progressed enough that I think since the industrial revolution at least, in my opinion, it can absolutely be done without slaves.

[Chazmatazz269]

I selected “I don’t know” only because “probably not” was not an option. Just cuz something has never been done doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

[Twalli]

I guess I can see your point, however as a historian I deal with facts and I see slavery preceding empire.

[Sargentcaptain]

In order to have slavery, you first need an empire.

[Twalli]

Not true at all. The U. S. had slavery long before we were an empire.

[Sargentcaptain]

Aha, and through what magical power did it obtain those slaves in the first place?

[Twalli]

We weren't an empire when we had slaves, although we got them from empires.

[Sargentcaptain]

And the empires just gave them away for free?

[Twalli]

No, we bought them.

[OtterMan68]

The US didn't have an empire until the 20th century when they got Hawaii and The Philippines.

[Twalli]

Yet for 87 years we had slavery.

[OtterMan68]

Before or after empire? What about Italian empire?

[Twalli]

Which one?

[OtterMan68]

Mussolini. Italy didn't have an empire before they took Ethiopia and Albania.

[Twalli]

They were at war so I don't know if that really counts.

[OtterMan68]

they invaded Ethiopia and Albania prior to Sept 1939

[Twalli]

Conquered areas during a war doesn't make an empire unless you maintain control afterwards.

[OtterMan68]

how long do you have to have control for it to be an empire? Italy had control of Ethiopia and Albania until 1944

[Twalli]

Yet after the war ended they didn't maintain control.

[OtterMan68]

so how long did they have to control them in order to be an empire?

[Twalli]

No time period, but conquest need to be maintained when conflict ends or else it doesn't count. Crimea became part of Russia, because they kept it after the conflict ended. The rest of Ukraine was not part of Russia because the conflict isn't over.

[NathanDavis]

which empires have you not studied?

[Twalli]

Most central African ones.

[NathanDavis]

let me know who it goes... when you do

[Twalli]

Hard to find information on them. I mean we have more on most pre-Columbian American Empires despite several not having a written language. Asian empires are harder too since the books on them usually aren't translated into English, so I have to put in a special order to get one translated.

[normalice]

Of course. It just takes longer

[Twalli]

Can you think of one?

[normalice]

No. I'm just talking about the math. It is slower leading free people to collective prosperity because everyone will have their own ideas of what that means or even if we should have it. Slavery avoids all of that but the sort of people who use slaves aren't the sort of people who care about collective prosperity. They're usually just going overboard in ensuring their own protection and understand the value of having slaves as a meat shield - thus allowing some modicum of that protection to "trickle down." This speeds up the development of the protection of the ruler in the short term but lacks the diversity of thought needed to expand and modernize those defenses in the long run. Then, the only real choice is to conquer other places before they develop ways to outwit the empire.

But even so an empire without slaves can be built if they are undiscovered by empires with slaves for a sufficient amount of time. It just, as I say, takes longer..

[ProbablyClueless]

It doesn't seem to be very possible.