Rank slave-owning civilizations from most to least ethical

Imperial China has one of the more ethical slavery systems as it is Penal in nature. The Old Chinks really didn't believe in imprisonment as they saw the whole practice as wasteful. Cells were mostly for people awaiting trial. So commit a certain degree of crime? Your entire sentence consists of a period of penal slavery.

The Chinese DID buy foreign slaves, but these were rarely for labor and mostly for show. Blonde/Red Headed Iranic women, Mongol Grooms, even some Africans and so on.

But there were dynasties in China that outlawed slavery completely. The Qin, Han, Early Ming and Qing famously.
I guess this is because manpower was never an issue in China.

Oh fuck,
I read OP as "rank slav owned civilizations"
As in primarily slavic countries.

>Turks were gud boyz. they dindu nuffin
>Girls wanted to be sex slaves
you're an insufferable cunt.

>people wanted some brutal brown mongoloids to kidnap their children and raise them as a heretical faith
lol ok. that's like "Blacks who wanted to stay slaves after the civil war" tier.
>which is also something a lot of women actively persued - being kept in a luxury prison by some old rich guy is still better then starving to death on some Balkan
Do you have ANY documentation of any Balkan sex slave saying that ever? even if one did, it hardly speaks for all them. You sure as hell don't have any auhtority to speak for them though, and what lifestyle (sex slave or peasant farmer) they would have preferred.
>every farmer was always starving
brainlet

That's great user, now prepare your kids for me I'll be stopping by to take them off your hands, since you like Ottoman slavery so much.

LOL meant for

You read what you want to read, my fellow Slav(e)

To be fair to that user, Janissaries were well-paid and enjoyed a higher status than most freemen and concubines were better fed than most freewomen. There were even concubines with relatively high political influence.

A great share of high-ranking government officials, up to the fucking grand vizier, were slaves.

In many ways, Ottomans adopted the Byzantine model of slavery.

It's baffling how you choose to ignore the fact that Janissaries were forcefully taken from their parents and brainwashed. But OK

Yes, sad. That happened to a lot of slaves all over the world. The thread is about comparing socities that upheld slavery, not comparing non-slaving societies with slaving societies.

It's about ranked slave society ethics. Kidnapping children and assimilating heritage are ethical factors that you can't ignore because you choose to.

I don't ignore it, I just don't see why separating children from their parents and giving them high-paying, high-profile jobs is worse than separating children from their parents in the context of chattell-slavery.

And as for the cultural factors, androcide is often a consequence of war and was done close to the West as late as the 20th century. Assimilation beats extermination in my book. And it isn't like cultural assimilation wasn't done by most other empires.

>implying people in the balkans weren't regularly exterminated
>implying Janissaries weren't sent back to the balkans where they would chimp out on their own kin
>implying they weren't genocided when they revolted

OP, are you trying to say that states that don't have formal systems of slavery are ethically superior? It's a practical question, there is no fundamental rule that slavery is inherently immoral.

For Pete's sake, if you want to discuss practical matters of ethics, first address the superior metaphysical (and specifically theological) issues that provide the very foundation for the discussion. Whoever is responsible for this POS thread should be enslaved and put to work in an Athenian silver mine. Un-fucking-believable.

Huurr let's rank states based on their ethics, but only mention states where slavery was a recognised institution, and also we won't have a fundamental discussion of morality or any real basis for our judgments.

...

Aztec slavery was pretty comfy. They could get paid, own slaves of their own, marry a nonslave and become free, children of slaves weren't slaves, could win their freedom in multiple ways: escaping the owner in the market place and if you made it out of the market and stepped on human shit you could be considered free (also no one was allowed to interfere in your escape except your slave master anyone who tried to stop you could be enslaved themselves). You then could go to the Tlatoani (king) or judges who acted on his word and ask for your freedom where he would have to give it to you. If you were a good slave and made your case you could also win your freedom. If you were abused you could also make a case in court and win your freedom. If you were a bad slave (performed poorly or were always disobedient after 3 strikes) you could be selected for sacrifice.

There were constant rebellions in bulgaria against devshirme. There were many accounts of Bulgarian women being tortured(for example, their nipples being torn) for hiding their sons from the blood tax. There even is a folk holiday, Petlyovden, or Rooster day, where families put rooster's blood on their household's door as a sign of being victims to the blood tax. Watch Vreme Razdelno if you want to see what actual attitudes towards ottomans were.

>implying the balkans weren't being massacred by everyone including themselves and even by the fucking Crusaders and random peasants that strode forth to push back the Turks before even the Ottoman Empire proper existed
>implying Janissaries being conscripted from the populations they were meant to subdue didn't promote restraint, much like having native troops did for colonial powers
>implying purges weren't standard protocol for revolts everywhere

Tell how the Ottoman Empire was worse than other slaving empires. Don't just tell that it was bad - I already know the world was always a violent place.

Spartacus disagrees

>whataboutism
>lies
>retarded comparissons
>mental gymnastics
Classic Osman

>implying the balkans weren't being massacred by everyone including themselves and even by the fucking Crusaders and random peasants that strode forth to push back the Turks before even the Ottoman Empire proper existed
Much less massacres than by turks. Also crusaders were beaten back by the Bulgarian empire at the Battle of Adrianople and Syar.

>implying Janissaries being conscripted from the populations they were meant to subdue didn't promote restraint, much like having native troops did for colonial powers
They were made to islamize christian populations. Said christians didn't want pisslam.
>implying purges weren't standard protocol for revolts everywhere
Except you said balkans were a peaceful paradise under the t*rks and that they were merciful

Look Selim, if you don't know anything about the balkans then you shouldn't post the bullcrap spewed by Islamic turkish education.

I think the Mamluk Sultanate has them beat in that regard.

Although Mamluks were bought, they had higher societal status than your average freeman. High ranking Mamluks took part in the election of a new Sultan, who was more often than not also a Mamluk themselves. The entire government was run and directed by people who were nominally slaves.

yeah and how'd that turn out? bad things happen to bad people, obviously

The thread is literally about comparing so it isn't whataboutism it is a comparison.

You don't adress my actual points, you just raise new ones and pretend that I'm arguing that Ottomans were nice. They were not. But since you need to make them into some special boogeymen instead of just seeing them as one of several long-lasting empires, with all the brutality that empire-building entails, I'm guessing you are still butthurt your ancestors got wrecked and never achieved the same level of relevancy? I'm guessing you are a Bulgar?

The thread isn't about comparing, retard, its about ethically ranking and nobody said they were worse than other empires. You were defending the fag that wanted to push tge idea of the Ottomans being nice guys. Then you trailed off and started bullshitting about how the Balkans were worse off before the Ottomans (which they weren't, the Ottomans are directly responsible for stunting the modern Balkan shithole and it's conflict) and now you're back pedalling like a fag. If you were being serious you would stick to the thread instead of memeing Ottoman dindus.
>i'm guessing you're a Bulgar
No, i'm just human, roach

Ranking is comparing, retard. Never said the Balkans were better before, they were backwaters for most of history, except for Greece. Even Byzantium couldn't keep Bulgaria civilized. No reason to blame the Ottomans for the troubles, that is just you guys being yourselves as usual.

All modern conflicts in the Balkans were religious and involved remnants of Ottoman bootlickers. Architecture and growth was destroyed and prevented from developing under the false pretences of feligious freedom. The most famous monuments and areas were vandalized, reworked and stolen, still sitting in Turkey today. Most of the landmarks and attractions in the Balkans were built/reconstructed after the Turks got kicked out. Millions of people were genocided and displaced up until 1974.
>most of them were backwaters
Nah, that's just your excuse for a human brain sympathizing with the destruction of civilizations. There's a reason why the Balkans look more middle eastern than the rest of Europe.

Shouldn't have broken up the Eastern Roman Empire, then. Lots of infrastructure, law and arts were binned by slavic savages who didn't have the decency of being properly hellenized/romanized.

But they were properly hellenized and Romanized. They were integrated into Byzantium peacefully enough with agreements of autocephaly after a bunch of raids. Bulgars and Serbs, later Russians, all adopted Orthodoxy and culture as well as alphabet derived from the Greeks. They were powerful and for the full extend of their existance, mostly co-operative and progressing. Hence the fraternal relations between Orthodox countries today and mutual discontent for eternal fearmongering by muslims and Catholics. They are all schizophrenic by now.

Sure, Bulgars and Byzantines were the best buds. It's not like Bulgaria tried to pull the Latins into war with Byzantium.

rome was pretty decent for slaves, there was a fuck ton of upward social mobility within rome, especially for slaves
for example, the son of an ex-slave was an emperor of rome during the year of the five emperors

They were both still leagues better off at war before the Ottomans occupied them

>Not wanting to be sluaghtered in colliseums to soothe the bloodthirst of freemen is bad

Not to mention Romans were the some of the first european civilisations to treat their slaves as disposable property. Chattel slavery was invented by romans.

The ottomans completely stunted any progress in the balkans

>No secular law
>no religious tolerance
>No printed books hundreds of years after it was introduced in western europe.
>No scientific development
>No religious tolerance
>No enlightenment
>No industrialization and extremely late development of capitalism. Hell, some of the first factories in the Ottoman empire were privately built by Bulgarians.
>No agricultural development or in livestck breeding. Turks were a nomadic horde with little agricultural knowledge that had to rely on the knowhow of Balkan peoples. but Islamic feudalism stopped progress in its tracks.

>I'm guessing you are still butthurt your ancestors got wrecked and never achieved the same level of relevancy

Balkans were conquered due to disunity, not due to superior turk "civilisation". Its our own fault. But its not for the turks to say that we were better off. Hell, even if they were a backwater, we would rather be conquered by anyone else than muslims. See how countries under austrohungarian rule like Slovenia, Czechia, and Hungaria turned out. Now compare them to former ottoman territories.

>they were backwaters for most of history
They weren't, but even if they were, ottoman savagery didn't help.
Bulgaria was as civilised as the byzantines, shitstainoglu.

I say again, if you don't know anything about the balkans other than "We wuz janniseries we cuck balkanlar" don't write crap. I actually have nothing against turks. Its the Ottomans and Islam that I hate. Tengri is cool.

And btw, the Ottoman empire used chattel slavery extensively. Who do you think rowed their galleys? So you're not better than other empires in that regard.

>law and arts were binned by slavic savages

The ottomans killed off the educated balkan rulership and thus stalled their civilisational development. In the middle ages. The balkans were progressing culturally as much as the rest of europe(denmark for example) except the hotbeds of the rennaissance in italy.

>t. troglodyte savage
>"I don't want to give up anything for civilization"

>Foreign slaves were for show
This reminds me a bit of the modern Chinese corporate practice of hiring foreigners to work for their companies and effectively serve as living advertisements.
Funny how the more things change the more they stay the same.

>not wanting to be tortured in a roman chattel and being fed to lions later

Roman civilisation was a mistake. Hellenistic and Iranic civilisations are far superior.

>The ottomans completely stunted any progress in the balkans

Biggest meme ever. Balkans were always a shithole

Why are romeboos so retarded that they have to portray contemporary huts or dens as "barbarian" architecture? If you were so superior at least post authentic celtic/germanic houses.

>Balkans were always a shithole

w-why do you specifically have to step in shit

Fucking retard. This isn't an excuse for how never contributed to the place. Or to anyone in your 1000 year existance

Actually I fully agree re: Hellenic civilization. Everything good about Rome came from Hellas. Same goes for Christianity; anything good is directly taken from 5th & 4th c. Hellenic philosophy.

As for Iranic... well let's just say that anything East of Ionia and West of Qin should have been bathed in nuclear fire a long time ago. Hebrew mythology poisoned the West, Buddhism poisoned the East. It is the eternal birthplace of intellectual degeneracy.

Iranic people werent responsible for these religions. They kept their religion to themselves and were tolerant of other civilisations.

Then perhaps they should have lived in a different geographical region. For what it's worth, they probably had it coming for clashing with the Hellenes. They should have just migrated (and taken the Thebans/Boiotians with them).

>Everything good about Rome came from Hellas.
The study of history has degenerated to nothing
Fuck all of you and your meaningless comforting catchphrases

I feel like Haitian slavery and Congo Free State "indenture" wasn't that bad.

Very hands off management for the latter.

kek

broke : Ottoman ruined balkans
woke : Serbs ruined balkans

Ottomans were pretty chill compared to their western counterparts when it came to slavery, anyone ITT saying otherwise is a butthurt s*rb

>most ethical

Antebellum United States
British Colonies
Republican Rome

>somewhat ethical

Persian Empire
Ancient Greece
Serfdom of the Russian Empire
Ottoman Empire
New Kingdom of Egypt

>least ethical

Latin American/Caribbean slavery
Congo Free State
GULAG system
Concentration Camps of Nazi Germany

>not even trying to be ethical

Modern globalization where more people are slaves than any previous point in human history

>join the royal ottoman court, live luxuriously under his protection, win his favor and become active in court politics and intrigue, even possibly having a son with the sultan, potentially landing him on the throne, for the low cost of occasionally having sex with the sultan and bearing at least one child
or
>spending your days in a hovel out in the middle of nowhere, constantly worrying about the possibility of raids, famine, or disease, with no chance of social mobility, being essentially forced to have a dozen kids with the constant threat of death by child birth and getting beat up by your illiterate husband for speaking when not spoken to first
You're kidding yourself if you think most women wouldn't leap at the opportunity, especially during that time period.

Achaemenid Persia
Ancient Egypt
Aztecs
Ancient Rome
China
USA

Jesus Christ. Execute every single last one of these Mudshit apologists.

>Dude we're gonna take your children.
>And turn them into elite soldiers/princesses/bureaucrats.
Those Balkan shitheap villages sure had it tough.

trips confim this is a good bost.

was super curious about this, myself...

redpill me, if giving your child under a slavery was so awesome everybody liked it, why literally every country who have been under turkish reign hates turks?

Same as every fucking Empire that collapsed in the 1900s

Nationalism of screaming minorities.

>Bulgaria was as civilised as the byzantines
this is what orthodox turks believe

>Buddhism poisoned the East
At least for the far East, Confucianism was the real poison.

>Confucianism was the real poison.
>Literally held China, Korea, and Japan together no matter what happened to them.
Lol OK.

>Persia achaemenids
>slave owning
???