Egyptian Muslims Create Human Shield To Protect Christians

[CattyNebulart]

eh here we get to issues of definition, usually indentured servants are not considered slaves, although there are many similarities there are also differences. arguing if it is or not use useless without a clear definition, hence I give you;
[quoute=World English Dictionary]
slavery ('sle?v?r?)

—n
1. the state or condition of being a slave; a civil relationship whereby one person has absolute power over another and controls his life, liberty, and fortune
2. the subjection of a person to another person, esp in being forced into work
3. the condition of being subject to some influence or habit
4. work done in harsh conditions for low pay
[/quote]

Number 4 would seem to cover most of the population on earth, so it is not very helpfull, similarly 2 and 3. So lets just consider the first definition.

Indentured Servant Contracts could be sold, and until their contract was up had their liberty and fortune controlled by their master. However their life was not under their masters control and at least in theory there where much stricter limits on what could be done to indentured servants. So it's close but not the same. In any case if you do stretch the definition of slavery to cover indentured servants you also catch other groups like children and pets. Where again there are in theory limits on what can be done but it's not always observed in practice.

As for conscription I don't think that could count as slavery either according to definition 1, since the military chain of command is not a civil relationship.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Ayiekie]

Yeah, the problem is that definition 1 is what everyone thinks of as "slavery" (even if historically many slaves had better conditions than this and in many cultures they could even rise to positions of power), but the other definitions make the term all but meaningless - you can call pretty much anything "slavery" if you don't like it.

[Rev Dark]

Slaves to the definition are we?  Chained to the dictionary as to the great and heavy oar?
The value of slaves historically has been tied to their availability and utility.  Rome in full get-you-conquer-on mode had surplus; they were disposable, readily cycled into the salt mines with the bones spit out in months or years at the most.  As the expansion slowed, so did the flow of new slaves, and the value rose; a small subset of slaves were rolled in the administrations of Tiberius and Claudius (his freedman Narcissus cleaned up the Messalina he made.) - the slave bureaucracy, but this only represented a small portion of the entire slave population - freedmen - slaves who earned enough to purchase their freedom were not particularly common.
Indentured servants were the best of both worlds for the truly unscrupulous - rather than slaves, whose maintenance was tied to specific standards, indentured servants could be worked to death; which was cheaper and more economically viable than the payout at the end of their term.

[robkelk]

Slaves to the definition are we?  Chained to the dictionary as to the great and heavy oar?

It sure looks like it...

And that's http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entr ... _gb0780350]definition #3 for "slave" in the online OED. &lt/irony>

But we have to have some touchpoint for what words mean, in order to be able to communicate. I do believe that everyone here except khagler agrees on the meaning of "slave" now...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[khagler]

Slaves to the definition are we?  Chained to the dictionary as to the great and heavy oar?

It sure looks like it...

And that's definition #3 for "slave" in the online OED.

But we have to have some touchpoint for what words mean, in order to be able to communicate. I do believe that everyone here except khagler agrees on the meaning of "slave" now...

Nope, I agree with the definition. I just don't believe in pretending something doesn't meet that definition when it clearly does.