Slavery in post-Apocalypse

[Atomkilla]

So, an opening crawl...

I'm been writing short stories here and there for some time now, few of them set in PA, but nothing big. Anyway, I've decided to give this new story a bit more complexity. To keep it short, I've been thinking about adding something like the Slavers guild.

Now, here's the thing.

This story (it's still an early draft) is set not-that-long after the apocalyptic events. For the reference, take the time frame of the original Fallout - it's basically the seed of the new civilization - it's not the already living and breathing young society of FO2. In a weird way, FO3's setting kind of fits it the best, at least when you take the whole civilization level (it's internal logic inconsistencies aside - also don't think Paradise Lost is used as any reference here).

So the basic idea is this - how, and why would a organization created around slavery prosper in the PA world - and more importantly, at which exact point would it get created? And where?

Grossly simplified, slaves have been used primarily for forced labor and amusement (from gladiator fights to prostitution). Modern slavery isn't much different.

But what would you regard as viable reasons for owning slaves - in mass numbers - in a world that is essentially rubble and is in early stages of rebuilding itself?


I personally have several ideas, but I would like to hear what do you guys think about this.




Edit: now that I think about it, this is perhaps better suited for Fan Art sub-forum, but I'd ask the moderators if it is possible to keep it here, since there's more traffic and all.

 

[BairdEC]

Why would slavery exist? For the same reason it did and does: there are things you want done that you are unwilling to do yourself, and a convenient group of people that can be cowed and forced to do the work for you.

 

[Atomkilla]

Why would slavery exist? For the same reason it did and does: there are things you want done that you are unwilling to do yourself, and a convenient group of people that can be cowed and forced to do the work for you.

Obviously.

But I'm thinking more specifically here - within the limits of post-apocalyptic chaos - who exactly is the group in force, who are the people that can be cowed and forced to to the work, how, and for what exact work.

 

[BairdEC]

I think that is far too broad a question. The enslaving group could any group which is willing to drop the moral opposition to slavery, whether for simple convenience (Metzger's gang) or a belief that they are actually superior (Vault 8/ Vault City). The enslaved will be those who are unable or unwilling to defend themselves (dis- or unarmed, or pacifists), the conquered, those who believe promises that the enslavers have the soon-to-be enslaved's best interests in mind, or even those who think they really are better off under the thumb of their enslavers. As far as what work? What needs to be done? Mining, farming, hauling, laundry, cooking, crafts/ manufacturing, soldiers, administrators.... You name it, slaves have done it.

Slavery doesn't even have to be the chattel type that was practiced in the Americas and just about everywhere else. Slaves have even been used to add to population groups (by adopting young children) and as status symbols.

 

[Izak]

How, and why would an organization created around slavery prosper in the PA world

Well that's simple, agriculture through labour would be incredibly important in the Post-Apocalypse, nobody wants to do that so they buy slaves, slavers prosper.

At which exact point would it get created? And where?

Generally when I think about the origins of awful institutions I like to think they grew out of understandable practises. Slavery, I suppose it'd come from something like forced labour with prisoners or POWs, after all it only make sense to put potentially dangerous but otherwise useless people to work, especially if you're starved for resources, but eventually that would grow into full on slavery.
In line with the previous paragraph, I suppose it'd make sense if slavery grew out of a prison that survived the apocalypse, with guards using prisoners as slaves, or you could go the other way and have the prisoners act as masters over the guards, that doesn't really need any justification.

What would you regard as viable reasons for owning slaves - in mass numbers - in a world that is essentially rubble and is in early stages of rebuilding itself?

Agriculture, construction, military and breeding. You could always use the reasons the Greeks and Romans used as well; they used slaves at the beginning of history to carve out empires (though I'm sure they used other justifications) it'd make sense if people used their methods and reasons to carve out empires in a Post-Apocalyptic world.

 

[Neane93]

Just my two cents.

Slavery doesn't have to be like how it was with the Slaver's Guild in Fallout 2 in which people were raiding tribals to get slaves. Like when the USA was first being colonized some people came to the New World in the form of indentured servitude in which they had to be like slaves in order to live here. Sometimes people would create really terrible contracts in which the length of indentured servitude would increase until life-time because of petty stuff like eating a grain or something.

Another one would be in which the people are paid but what they are getting can only be used to purchase stuff from the master. Corporate towns during the Victorian era had that and that would be considered slavery by some people. (The company would pay wages, but the wages would come back to the company for food and shelter so in the end you would be getting no actual income)

>who are the people that can be cowed and forced to to the work

In a low resource world after the bombs were dropped people would sell themselves in order to get food and shelter. In the case of voluntary becoming slaves I think that it would be mainly survivors in cities who have no experience surviving without assistance in the form of governmental aid (rations and protection for example). The USA had to send power armor units to make sure that city life was able to function and without that protection cities would become desolate thanks to violence and nothing can grow on concrete. The survivors would go out into the country and there would be people living off the land. The city survivors would have to convince the others that they are worth being fed because if they don't contribute they would be a waste of resources so they become slaves in exchange for food and shelter.

Van Buren's Blackfoot tribe were a combination of pre-war soldiers that proved their worth via protecting the farmers and all the stuff they gained via working was given back to the farmers. Obviously the troops were not slaves but you could do something similar with that arrangement in which any material wealth would go back to the farmers.

Unless there is segregation going on (there is a difference between the masters and the slaves) then maybe eventually the slaves and the farmers would end up becoming one tribe, so there would have to be some sort of difference between the farmers and the slaves if you want it to continue for longer amounts of time (for example Vault City had the whole "we are superior to the slaves" like how Victorian Era Europe had Social Darwinism and Eugenics in order to justify them treating the "lesser races" the way they did. Or could be like the Roman Empire where slaves weren't freemen and thus had no rights.)

 

[Vergil]

I agree that slavery would basically be like indentured servitude or serfdom for the most part, at least in the beginning when basic amenities aren't so plentiful. People basically selling themselves to work their owner's land in return for protection, shelter and a bit of food. Their not slaves in the traditional sense as they do get paid for their services. Once things get more civilized and people have to worry less about basic things like shelter, food, water, and protection would you start to see slavery for more mundane tasks.

 

[DVL]

It's just going to be slavery.
A Roman slave could have a reasonably good life and a reasonably generous and fair master. Or he could be working the salt mines.
He might even free you one day. Or not. And mind you, freedom isn't always a good thing, since that's just sometimes a way that he can cut you lose and rid himself of the cost of keeping you around. If you're lucky, then he helps you get started or gives you a leg to stand on as a freedman. And the latter pretty much assimilates you into the culture and economy. (You're a Roman freedman who is now an up and coming business associate to your former master? Why, you're basically a Roman now.)

Obviously a lot of this is going to vary by time and place. But examples of civilized slavery that existed in the Deep South or the Roman Empire are more or less what you can expect. A lot depends on how this stuff is legally codified.

I mean, technically, it could be socially gauche to abuse your slaves, but if it happens behinds closed doors or outside of polite company then either nobody cares nor has much legal right to do much about it. And even then, most people are simply prejudiced against the slave and aren't going to really care that much.

Indentured servitude is pretty fucking miserable for the most part. The creditor needs to get what he's owed back from the debtor, who is going to resent him but is legally obligated to obey him. Even as a creditor, you don't really want to bother with an unmotivated and/or hostile worker when you can just have the cash.

The Romans just got slaves from whoever they conquered as spoils of war.
Black slaves were just more or less a case of Africans nabbing other Africans to sell for a quick buck. Because they probably didn't have a national sense of identity. You don't give a shit what happens to that other tribe from across the river. They're an entirely different nation.

 

[Kadscaner]

I could see how it would be usefull in the apocalypse. Have your slaves make food, drugs, clean your house, take care of animals, etc. you could also tag them along on caravans and make em carry a bunch of heavy shit.

 

[Borov]

Who:
People with power such as having firepower or the power in numbers. Ex military soldiers, mercenaries, cops, escaped convicts or just a group of ordinary people who decided that having slaves would be useful.

How:
They get slaves by overwhelming other people with their superior might. The slaves are usually families and lone wanderers. They will capture them preferably by ambushing them.

Why:
Manpower, sex, food, money, obtaining resources, construction, moving from one place to another, etc. Also they would categories every individual such as training children to become slavers, using women for breeding and misc. Stuff such as cleaning and cooking, and men for anything that requires physical strength.

What else., what else....

They would also try their best to gain the trust of their slaves by feeding them as best as they can with of course the promise of shelter and everything alike. The only reason why the slaves are slaves is because they are outnumbered (important) and they lack the weapons to fight back. Also a slave is to be killed as a last resort, because why lose merchandise just because one slave or two slaves wont work because they share the same toilet or some such bullshit... Instead, WHACK EM

 

[Atomic Postman]

As someone else touched on, whilst the usual Legion style of slavery would almost definitely occur, the most prevalent and morally ambiguous (and therefore juicy material to explore) would be indebted servitude to masters with resources and supplies to keep them alive. A good example would be Immortan Joe in Mad Max: Fury Road. A scenario in which the slave masters are the only ones in the region with clean water, food or electricity. I imagine this kind of society would be very widespread shortly after the war.

As for a Slaver's Guild, I would say to look once again to Mad Max: Fury Road for inspiration. The three war lords of the Wasteland have a kind of pact and seem to be allies that exchange resources and manpower to assist each other in maintaining power. You could have an interesting sub-plot with the various slave masters in this alliance trying to underhandedly usurp each other and shift power within the guild. Cutting others out of the equation etc.

Slavery is definitely an underutilized aspect of the Wasteland, considering it's a hallmark of savage human nature and that's really what the Wasteland is all about.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I am curious though, how common was slavery? I mean in general. As far as I can tell, but I am hardly an expert on that field, it seems to occur in larger societies. But how common was it in tribal and smaller structures? I could see slavery in something that was as large like the Legion or the NCR, with a society to support it. But shortly after the apocalypse? Or with smaller communities? I don't think we would really see something like slavery. Forced labour maybe, for punishing crimes. But survival would be probably way to dependand on finding common ground to really allow slavery. At least that is what I think.

 

[BairdEC]

Common in game or in the real world? In game, we didn't see much slavery beyond the slavers and a couple other locations, but the slavers must have been selling to somebody.

Real world? That depends on how small you want to go. Small tribes of a dozen or so people are probably not going to have much in the way of forced-labor slavery. Large tribes that are essentially small towns and cities will, as well as their supporting communities (think of the classical Greco-Roman world, as well as Scandinavia, the Rus, southwest Asia, various groups in Indonesia, the steppe tribes of Asia, and the Aztecs). In general, I think the smaller the group, the better the slaves' treatment will be; a high slave-to-free ratio makes slave revolts more likely. When a group uses more slaves than free labor, the treatment of the slaves tends to be pretty harsh to keep the slaves in line. Slavery in the real world was nigh-universal until a Franciscan priest began calling for its abolition in the 1500s.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Yeah, well I am just curious, because honestly I have no clue. But I wouldn't be surprised if slavery wasn't as common as it might seem, the kind of slavery we saw in the united states for example. Because when you think about it, it takes a lot of effort to not only get slaves but to also make sure that you can keep them. Take the Romans for example, their slaves had quite a lot of rights. It just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me, in a society that is supposed to be gone. Like if there is nothing that can actually enforce rules or the like.

 

[Earth]

Probably been mentioned already but conquest would play a part. One group attacks another for resources, takes people as resources.

 

[R.Graves]

Probably been mentioned already but conquest would play a part. One group attacks another for resources, takes people as resources.

Like Caesars legion?

There's also convenience as a reason like Metzger and co.

And there's "its fine because I'm better than you" like vault 8

And then there's the classic I'm evil for no reason. Like paradise falls. (Particularly it's leader and his daughter).

 

[Earth]

And then there's the classic I'm evil for no reason. Like paradise falls. (Particularly it's leader and his daughter).

Yeah....fuck Paradise Falls. Such wasted potential. A slaver faction was one of the few things in that game that could have made sense, but everything about it made no sense at all. Who are their customers?

Woulda been neat if places like Megaton were actually propped up by slavery. Imagine if Dad was actually from a slave-built Rivet City. Not so keen to help daddy purify the water now are ya punk!

Anyway, yeah Caesar's Legion, but also just any old group trying to develop some kind of territory. As territory is usually taken to make use of the resources, it would make sense that if you had a militia of some sort and took control of a town with iron ore or whatever, that you'd then say, "well fuck if I'm gonna do any of the work, how about you losers mine that iron for me, otherwise I'll kill you with this big gun that I just used to take control of your town?"

In a world like Fallout, anyone with strength can boss around anyone weaker than them. It's why societies like the Great Khans would be so obsessed with physical strength and endurance.

 

[R.Graves]

"There's so little to do in Fallout 3 that even the slaves are idle."

Seriously they just sit around in cages doing nothing.

 

[Earth]

"There's so little to do in Fallout 3 that even the slaves are idle."

Seriously they just sit around in cages doing nothing.

You'd think Tenpenny Tower would use slaves at least.

It's actually interesting thinking about the societies that don't depend on slavery, and those that do (or did).

I guess Shady Sands and Arroyo are notable for not using slavery. Junktown, Modoc, Gecko, San Franscisco and the Hub as well come to think of it.

Everywhere else though you could argue make either use of full on slavery or indentured servitude. The Den obviously uses it, as does Klamath with indentured servitude. Vault City uses slaves, so does New Reno. The Khans used to, and it's surprising that they apparently stopped using them by 2281. Adytum has the Regulators controlling everyone, using their arsenal to tell people what to do. Necropolis was similar, and the Enclave used slaves too. You could probably argue the Master's Army used slaves as well, brainwashing the Children of the Cathedral. I don't think they were paying them. Then of course there's the Legion, with Caesar implying that the tribes he conquered made use of slaves.

I guess places like Shady Sands were able to develop in the way they did both through safety in numbers (ie: they're not overwhelmed and destroyed by the slaver Khans), technological know-how (having originated from a vault) but also a set of principles, granting everyone some level of freedom and equality.