Extraterrestrial Slavery

>>2415757
Yes and no

>>2415773
I wouldn't support the enslavement of other humans, but in the context of other nonhuman species (assuming they exist), it seems like it would be the best thing to do to defend ourselves.

I believe Stephen Hawking was the one who said that meeting aliens would be like being the Indians when they met Christopher Columbus. The solution to that seems to be to mimic Columbus.

Would it be an efficient system that is compatible with a market economy? Could we see similar populist divides over the system in the run up to the American Civil War in that scenario? For instance, competition between alien slave labor and human free labor for the same job that could breed an anti-slavery movement that isn't based on the welfare of aliens, but more so on stopping the concentration of power and capital into a few hands?

File: 42341.jpg (162KB, 800x968px)

162KB, 800x968px

Depends if you think physiological features are a determinant for rights v. behavioral.

The question really isn't too far removed from that concerning other nations, or more generally other groups.

I'd be against xeno-slavery on if they were shown to have even rudimentary behavior similar to our own,
and also I'd be against it on pragmatic grounds as the historical case seems to go that slavery never seems to end well for the dominant group,
maybe making it a threat to any sort of long-term supremacy.

>>2415757
we would be the slaves

>>2415797
Should we just exterminate them if we find them or make them client states then? If there are truly more advanced species out there, as >>2415800
suggests, wouldn't the best path of survival be to develop some form of humanocentric nation?

Columbus might've been a shitty person, but Spain held onto South America for a while and still has global importance today, as minute as it may be, because of him. Spanish is one of the most commonly spoken languages in the world and Spain is a big cultural center. Should humanity not mimic the same?

I'm kind of with you on the pragmatic concerns though. There could be competition between alien slave labor and free human labor. As the example of the American South shows, cheap slavery held back technological progress and industrialization that still affects the region to this day.

In what cases would they not display rudimentary behavior similar to our own?

>>2415757

I'd say as a rule, you should only enslave non-people. So, if it's conscious of the environment, of the self, and can analyze the both of them, no slavery. If they're like, say, cows, go ahead.

>>2415842
But what if they are actively hostile and seek to eliminate us. Should we resort to mass exterminating them in a "make the sand glow" type of total war?

Of course we should enslave them, we need to make money off of space travel somehow.

>>2415866
What about the inevitable question of whether human/free labor should be used versus slave labor? Aren't we playing with fire by using slavery?

For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord's freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ's slave.

>>2415873
slaves or extermination as long as we take their resources

kinda depends whos on top

>>2415859

If their trying to literally exterminate us we should wage war until they desist. If they don't desist until they're all dead, then kill them all.

The morality of the act would depend more on how it's done. I really, really, don't like bombing civilians and I don't see that much of a difference between atom bombs and conventional explosives.

File: EVE Empires.png (527KB, 712x1480px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 712x1480px

>>2415757
>If humanity were to expand into the stars, would it be moral for us to enslave less developed alien civilizations in protection of humanity's supremacy?

Yes.

(White)Man's Burden.

>>2415894

*they're

Sorry, tired and english as a second language don't make for good grammar.

>>2415895
Haha fucking this. Gotta say I'm a Gallente man here. Probably because I'm an edgelord neocon.

How should we best go about doing it though? Spanish/Belgian style stuff or more like English/French soft colonialism?

>>2415885
Can't the case be made if we're talking religion that insectlike hive mind aliens are probably more analogous to demons than creations of God?

>>2415929

>because I'm an edgelord neocon.

Fucking kill yourself.

>>2415937
Angels?

>>2415784

>The solution to that seems to be to mimic Columbus

He meant that Ayylmaos would be more advanced than us and would prey on Earth's natural resources. Without technological superiority, we couldn't mimic Columbus.

>>2415757

I would say no and no. If they are hostile, it would be more efficient, barring extreme labour shortages, to just kill them off entirely. If they are sentient and not hostile, why enslave them?

>>2415939
Jej it was just a meme

>>2415929
>I'm a Gallente man here.

ACTUALLY kill yourself please.

>>2415987
It's a meme it's a meme

>>2415951
I understand that those aliens may be superior to us. But why shouldn't we enslave those that are inferior, to make our civilization stronger when we encounter a group that is superior?

>>2415987
>Caldaricucks can't even retake their homeworld and are forced to share it with the Gallente
stay buttblasted senpai

>>2415757
Slavery is wrong, it being the domestication of intelligent beings.
Slavery sucks because machines can do the job better than some faggot who hates you and doesn't wanna be there.
Slavery is a poor system because if your slaves become ill or injured, you're responsible, or out a slave.
If you're paying some poor bastard to fix your robot "slaves", it's not your problem if he breaks his arm playing football.
It's also not your problem if he goes into debt, which is on him since he owns himself.
What's gonna happen is something like the Federation in Star Trek. A bunch of alien races living under, and participating in, human government. Effectively, being human as far as the law and government are concerned.

I'm really hopeful for a human superiority first contact scenario.
Best case, we stumble across a slave ship that's had a mutiny, and the slaves join us. We pump out combat ships based on the new tech, free the rest of them, and then we have 2 full "slave" races if you include the squid-heads we just shit on to free the rat-boys.
The galactic government catches wind of all this and decides the humans have come too far, too fast. After a small series of battles where the humans are beaten, but not easily, the GalGov caves in and extends membership to the new human empire/federation/republic/happening.

>>2415873
>>2415820
>free human labour
By the time this scenario comes around the main competitor to slave labour would be machines.

>>2416067
That's true.

>>2416067
Would slavery have any advantages over mechanization in that case?

It'd be smarter to just make them heavily reliant on us whether through use of some of our lesser technologies or through making them worship us if they lack the scientific understanding for that.

>>2415757
No they are not human, there is some stupid idea that intelligent aliens would not be racist actually they would be very racist because they would intelligent thus not care about things like outliers but look for consistent average variables in a species.

>Im not a stupid ape like them Lord Zeglorp
>Myzorp that thing just spoke to me kill it immediately
>With pleasure my lord

Intelligent aliens view humans the same way humans view ants, they dont give a shit what we look like or what we care about , or or our feelings. They would be so smart that they could modify our brains to always like our enslavement in the first place.

>>2416010
Slavery on a space scale has nothing to do with economy anon its to do with the slavers being evil. Humans just love to inflate their egos and nothing makes a human more egocentric than treating another sapient being like complete shit(this is the source of bullying behavior btw).

It's either enslavement or extermination, coexistence would be almost impossible, we wage wars against ourselves, do you think we'd have any problems fighting one against another species?

File: 1474732084336.gif (1MB, 500x558px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x558px

What would be the point of large scale enslavement? Like some other anon said, you'd assume by that point in our technological development there would be no need for large scale "man"power work to be done that machines couldn't do.

>>2416180
The point is to trip your ego.

>>2415757
>would it be moral for us to enslave less developed alien civilizations in protection of humanity's supremacy?
We did that before and stopped it.

>>2415784
What is protective about enslavement? Just kill them all.

>>2415757

>Implying robots wouldn't make manual labor obsolete

If we find any intelligent civilization, the best course of action is to exterminate them, in order to prevent any future conflicts and clear their home planet for human colonization.

>>2416206
If they come from a very different type of planet, you may need then for mining and what not.

Imagine if the aliens evolved in a methane based atmosphere or something. It would be cheaper to have 500 soldiers force 10000 natives to work, than to outfit 10000 humans and pay them.

Or, if the aliens evolved on a high gravity world, you could use them or their technology as more efficient manual laborers on earth.

If and when we do find underdeveloped aliens, some bean counter administration would figure out if it was best to enslave, ally, or exterminate. It's case by case.

>>2415894
even then we should keep some for the hope of peace later
even if you reject that they should be studied extensively, you never know what compounds and genetic material might be in their bodies that would be beneficial to us

>>2416206
Also, you could control breeding policy to ensure they never surpass a certain need. Never let them become a threat, while keeping with labor demands.

>>2415757
We should respect their space and check our privilege.

>>2416118
you're forgetting that outside of children with a mean streak, no human goes out of their way to kill ants, precisely because they don't care
if you want to make an analogy like that you should use mosquitoes or lice or something

>>2415757
I fluctuate on the right answer to this from time to time. Part of me says and and part says no.

On one hand, sentient creatures probably deserve some amount of respect no matter what they are. At the same time, their concepts of morality and culture may be so far removed from our own that there's simply no way to coexist after contact. Even taking the route of applying the rights of man to aliens, what happens if the aliens live in a caste system or some such where part of their population is kept as social pariahs, which is the very thing we seek not to do? We can interfere and force our will on them, or we can say they have a right to govern themselves and condemn multitudes of their own to something we see as injustice.

And then, there's always the very simple stance of seeing them as competing organisms and their continued existence allows for their eventual rise and potential domination of other species, possibly even our own. From that point of view, it's entirely likely to see them as a threat that must be eliminated before they can eliminate us since peaceful coexistence is never guaranteed. All it would take is for the balance of power to tip in their favor and allow them to annihilate anything they don't like.

>>2416180
>>2416206
Doesn't massacring presumably an entire civilization of aliens, even if they are lesser than us, seem like a massive use of resources? Perhaps if we develop an interstellar empire, couldn't aliens take the place of machines in far away or remote locations, where the use of machines may require constant repair and technical knowledge that isn't available.

>>2416218
This is what I mean. Certain aliens might have traits that would make them more suited to doing certain work.

>>2416244
Why wouldn't they challenge a civilization that could be a potential threat? Not everyone is going to hold hands and sing kumbaya, just look at the modern world. They might be influenced by their religion, by conquering natural resources, or just by their own nature.

>>2416255
well which is it? are we a credible threat or are we just a curiosity?

>>2416255
also their religious and philosophical views are relevant but also a complete crap shoot, there's all of human history to pull from to try to begin to understand what they might potentially believe
as for natural resources, I would hope that they would first try to terraform and mine nearby uninhabited worlds, like we want to do with Mars

>>2415757
Oh senpai, there's these things called "robots." Pretty cool, if I say so myself.

>>2415757
Depends on how we're defining slavery, if you mean in a similar form to human on human slavery than no I don't see that as moral in any case involving a sentient being (I'd include robots in this as well but that's another story). If we're in a situation like
>>2416245
Where another species either holds values incompatible to our own like being slavers themselves or if they're going full galactic domination I'd fully support subjugation into a Human cultural hegemony

>>2416344
Even so though, the ideas and values of a species can change over time, and when they do, who's to say we won't be on the receiving end of a renewed call for interstellar dominance?

I think one of the best things for certain would be to ensure that any other interstellar species remains confined or locked to its own planet or solar system if possible. That's not to say we have to be cruel to them via slavery or any other sort of oppressive methods, but as soon as a species is able to leave its home system, that opens up an entirely new issue that they can spread and overwhelm us to the extent that we cannot contain them or prevent their eventual rise.

>>2415757
Depends on how human they look and if we can breed with their women. That is if they have any to begin with.

>>2416396
So basically we keep them under semi-colonial rule?

No. Edginess and moralfaggotry aside, doing this would be suicide.

Humans only live 120 years tops and interstellar travel takes a lot longer. So if we, as we are, find a whole alien civilization with sentient beings, then most likely the universe is teeming with life and far more complicated than we could ever imagine. If this is the case we shouldn't fuck around too much, we should have something like the prime directive.

The goal of expansion should overwhelmingly be to identify threats to our survival, not plunder. In fact degenerates like most of you would have to be considered a liability and kept away. We need goody2shoes like cpt Kirk.

So we enslave some fuzzy bunny like creatures. We notice playing video games against them that their reaction times and ability to learn and develop new skills are incredible. A new bunny player can figure out exploits and how to kill a human tournament champion after just a few hours of play.

As slaves they realize their survival depends on the perception they are useless as fighters but useful as slaves, so they keep this under wraps and worm their way into our society. Their talents render them masters of manipulating the physical world and the brutality they have seen has utterly set in their mind the necessity of wiping humanity from existence. To them it is final and complete, like 1+1=2, it must happen and every fiber of their being will be devoted to this task.

One day we let slip, some bunny is used to manage the water supply, he figures out a way to kill thousands, but not yet, he contacts the bunny underground and communicates using a kind of morse code by hitting a pipe with a screwdriver. Once everything is in place the plan is put into action. By the time human authorities respond they have constructed starships with weapons and crews that surprise our overengineered and inexperienced hulks. We can't defeat them and in time the last humans are refugees fleeing into unknown space in our fastest ships.

What about wage slavery? Is it moral for us to make them do backbreaking work for pennies a day?

>>2416439
Ehhh... and I should point this out to the whole thread... Stephen Hawking was drawing the comparison with Columbus, but if you read his book, resource grabbing and slavery isn't what he was actually worried about, for one damned good reason:

In a universe with no FTL travel, the amount of resources you need to get to another solar system, is practically unimaginable. It's theoretically possible, yes, but by the time you can do it en mass, and regularly, you've ended all your natural resource problems.

If a spacefaring race comes across non-spacefaring race, assuming FTL isn't a thing, they are NOT going to use them for labor (unless the species is just somehow friggin amazing at it). A race that can regularly travel the universe en mass, has no natural resource shortages, period. They might have some artificial ones, but they'd be of a sort that is very difficult, if not impossible, to mass produce, and mere brutes aren't going to help with that.

In such a universe, when a spacefaring race meets one confined to its planet, there are three possibilities as to the result:
1) They are set aside as a biological preserve and largely left to themselves (best case scenario - maybe you take some unfortunate samples, but that's about it, you got the tech to duplicate the genetics from one sample).

2) Since you pretty much have to have discovered biological immortality (or mechanical conversion) to be a spacefaring race, and thus are forward thinking... You wipe them out preemptively before they can develop into a threat.

3) If you're some sort of bleeding heart superrace, you try to "uplift" them. This may not be pleasant for them, and will probably result in their future generations being unrecognizable to the original species.


Now, if FTL is a thing, and it's fairly easy to do - that's a whole other bag of worms.

File: Pyramids+were+built+by+aliens+the+picture+states+that+egyptian_9e3787_4804176.png (239KB, 762x337px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 762x337px

>>2415757
Assuming we discover a low-resource method of faster than light travel (otherwise see >>2416520 - no reason to do that), while it'd be a bad idea, I could certainly see us doing it. Particularly if there was an active threat to our supremacy.

Whether they "deserve" "rights", is up to the humans of the time... But by modern moral standards, of course they would. (Also you mean sapience. Sentience kinda comes with not being a plant. Though we give animals some rights too these days.)

But even these days, we'll collectively toss our morality out the window in a heartbeat for the sake of even economic survival. In an intergalactic war scenario in which we needed to mine stuff fast, any protest would be completely ignored. I'm sure there'd be some though - hell, people bitch about us ecologically scarring planets that don't even support life right now.

Assuming the FTL is some sorta teleportation type deal, thus we aren't tossing super-destructive relativistic objects at each other, it would come to bite us in the ass though. I mean, at first, it'd probably be a series of proxy wars over these slave labor mining planets, but eventually, those guys are going to work out FTL as well (or perhaps steal it). They'll teleport off to who knows where, build an army of vengeance, and come back to find us.

Additionally, any species that is a result of such a revolution, and has been around a lot longer, and gets wind of our activities, will immediately take us out on principle.

Given how long the galaxy has supported life, such a species could be billions of years ahead of us, and may just be smarter naturally to begin with and thus effectively billions more, so it could be a very one-sided battle resulting in an extinction that we probably deserved.

>>2416180
sex slaves

Why is nobody defining what kind of slaves they'd be? You have to be pretty fucking stupid to think we'd still need living organism field hands by the time we're exploring and projecting power across the stars. With that in mind, what is it that we need them to do, or rather that we'd be forcing them to do? If we forced them to stay inside an enclosed bubble where we could watch them grow and mature while being unable to escape, would that count as slavery, or just imprisonment? We'd be forcing them to direct their efforts on their own world instead of any kind of interstellar colonization/terraforming/whatever


wait this shit ain't history or humanities really

>>2416710
>Would they deserve the same rights as humans if they possess sentience?
...Which makes it more /his/ than /sci/ though it is pushing it (as all & humanities does) and it's hard not to get hung up on particulars like you just did.

He's really asking, "Do all sapient life forms deserve human rights?" - even if it is still kind of a crap vague question.

>>2416425
Pretty much. Ensure they never catch up, and it won't matter what their opinions are because they won't be able to enforce them on us. They would, however, probably grow to resent us, but at the end of the day, I'd rather they resent us for being held back to a single system than have them match our size and find another reason to hate us anyway.

File: india_vs_alien_invasion.png (432KB, 1304x1818px) Image search: [Google]

432KB, 1304x1818px

>>2416787
It'll suck for us when we have a bunch of internal strife that prevents us from maintaining that colonial blockade and they take what tech we leave behind and build on it.

...or some much older and advanced species that was once so treated finds out about it, and decides we need to be taught a darwinistic lesson.

>>2416792
Honestly that's a really autistic scenario

>>2416439
I think in the case we have a biologically superior species at our mercy at any point, it would be better to takes steps to exterminate them quietly than leave them alive at all. If the universe turns out to be full of species intellectually superior to our own, we may be doomed anyway since it's only a matter of time before we wind up marginalized and out competed even at peace.

>>2416797
...and yet it happened here.

Those who fail to learn from history, get killed by poor extraterrestrial management decisions.

>>2416103
Alien slaves (if primal) are cheaper, may be equally productive, and could potentially breed faster than we can shit out expensive machines.

>>2416824
So it would really just be the security costs of administering all of those slaves that becomes a problem?

ITT: Your terrible ideas make me feel better about mine.

>>2416892
Why do all sapient life forms deserve the same rights as humans, especially when failing to dominate other sapient life forms threatens the continued existence of humanity?

>>2416930
We give many non-sapient life certain rights these days. Certainly sapient life would "deserve" it by modern standards.

If our existence was on the line, however, they certainly wouldn't get it. We don't even do that for other humans (at least not collectively).

>>2416947
But there's a difference, for instance, animal rights. Animals have no threat to our way of life, whereas you can clearly see how lesser alien species can mobilize against us. If they are truly so threatening, a massive war to wipe them out would be incredibly costly and thus slavery could be a potential solution, though it isn't perfect. Just look at how it took the United States to fight the Indians as an example.

>>2416984
Well, unlike the indians, for spacefaring humans, wiping out a less developed species is a hell of a lot cheaper than enslaving them. Just drop a rock on em - or, if you're patient, find a big one and paint the right side white. Either way, end of problem.

I assume he means we're enslaving them to mine resources for us to use against some other species that IS a threat, either that, or just to increase our resource holdings in hopes of maintaining our dominance against potential ones. (This again all assume cheap FTL.)

Morally, that's fucked up. But necessity tends to override the spook of morality, particularly on large scales, or if you're already in an existential war.

>>2416984
>Animal develops sapience
>Oh well suddenly it's a threat, time to kill it off!

Is it even a wonder that the world's most intelligent species are all endangered save for man and magpie?

>>2417021
...Also depends on why you enslave them.

I mean, if we come across a species that's much like our own, save quite a bit more violent, to find they just discovered nukes and are about to off themselves. If we're so much more advanced we can come down and disarm them, and feel that we can help them by enslaving them... I suppose you can argue that's on some level moral. It'd be interfering with free will, but maybe only so much so as a parent to a child.

Granted, it could easily come back to bite us in the ass, but well, so could enslaving them for entirely selfish reasons.

>>2417057
I suspect a super-advanced, more forward thinking, and more paranoid species might just wipe out any life it found, sapient or not, just in case.

I mean, we can be dicks - but it's kind of an accident of evolution that our empathy instinct actually extends to other species at all. We might actually be one of the nicer species in the galaxy.

File: narn_shall_be_free.gif (2MB, 420x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 420x240px

>>2416787
Ask the Centauri how that went for them, both times.

>>2417077
>it's kind of an accident of evolution that our empathy instinct actually extends to other species at all

It was neither an 'accident of evolution' nor does our 'empathy instinct' extend to other species. We happily killed off the neanderthals. The species our empathy does extend to, the cute domesticates, serve valuable practical and emotional purposes to us. Survival of the cutest rules, and people love their dog and cat over any wild animal on a typical basis.

The development of anthropomorphism in human culture was a necessary prerequisite for the domestication of animals. You need to be able to project human traits onto a dog if it is to hunt with you. You need to be able to extend base emotionality into a horse if you're going to calm it down enough to not buck on you. You need to show cattle conform before hooking them up to the plow. It's the reason the first human artworks ever are all zoomorphic. Doubly so considering they didn't have 10000 years of selective breeding on their side.

Without domestication, all human civilization, which, until the Industrial era, was driven by the mechanical power of beasts, would not exist. Simple as that. You need domesticates in order to form a civilization.

File: all_tomorrows_gravitar.png (713KB, 675x972px) Image search: [Google]

713KB, 675x972px

>>2417105
>The species our empathy does extend to, the cute domesticates, serve valuable practical and emotional purposes to us. Survival of the cutest rules, and people love their dog and cat over any wild animal on a typical basis.
That's exactly what I'm talking about though - that's an accident of evolution - we like cute things that look like our babies. It could have just as easily gone in such a way that the identifier was something much more unique than vague appearance, such as an enzyme or pheromone.

We've, through social evolution, extended that to less cute things, to a degree, and that's only continuing to expand. (Even if it seems our ability to extend empathy to one another is improving a bit slower.) Tiny social instincts get writ large in the grander social civilization.

Another species might not have any such need for beasts of burden or they might have had ways of controlling them that didn't require empathy. If they've been around long enough, they may had replaced all their beasts of burden with more efficient artificial counterparts millions of years ago and thus wiped them all out - maybe wiped out every species that wasn't there own, once they no longer had need of them. It may also be that part of their environment simply required them to be a lot more picky about what they extended their empathy to.

They might, at this point, not even think of anything but themselves as life at all.

There's simply a lot more evolutionary possibilities for empathy not extending to other species - this planet's life path may very likely the exception to the rule.

Though it would be a sad state of affairs for the universe, if we're the "nice guys".

>>2417100
It comes down to asking ourselves, do we feel more secure in attempting to build goodwill and hope it will be returned or never letting an alien species off their leash? I could see the former being a better alternative though in a universe where there's multiple species rather than a single one since each can serve as a foil to each other (This one wants to kill the other, but the ten or so races together have signed a galactic accord that prevents interstellar war.), but then that's a whole other can of worms.

File: b5_g'kar_freedom2.png (391KB, 600x435px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 600x435px

>>2417188
>never letting an alien species off their leash?
Never say never. Eventually, it will bite you in the ass.

Granted, so will the other way - but at least you won't have earned it.

>>2417105
>>2417179
I've read somewhere that it's thought that a specific type of parasite found in cats actually affects the minds of humans to produce that semi-euphoric state from them, but I don't remember where I read that. It would certainly make sense in the behavior of some cat lovers out there.

Which makes me wonder, if there's any truth to that, what would happen to us as a whole if we found an alien species with a similar trait? Say, a pheromone that induces a euphoric state in humans to the point it clouds our judgement? Would we fight amongst each other attempting to do something about it?

>>2416593
So don't be an immoral shithead.

>>2417203
I don't know, I suppose it simply comes down to if we think we're able or not. Neither prospect is very encouraging, and certainly makes a case for extinction of sentient beings.

>>2416201
This, imperialism/fascism is the only system that makes sense if civilization goes intergalactic

>>2417208
Well, toxoplasmosis works to its own ends, not the cat's, and only works because it evolved alongside mammals. ...But for that scenario, you can always watch any Star Trek episode involving Orion slave girls.

>>2417208
Toxoplasmosis infects more people through pork products than cat ownership. Just because cats are their natural host doesn't mean they can't harbor themselves in any other mammal.

>>2417216
>I don't know, I suppose it simply comes down to if we think we're able or not.
Well, I'd hope we'd learn enough from our own history that we can't - but if there's anything I've learned from history, it's that we don't learn from history.

In an easy FTL universe, I don't see us running around and wiping out all life we see though (at least not above board). People wouldn't stand for it.

In a non-FTL universe, however, by the time we got to be immortals cruising the universe with our kugelblitzed black holes, we'd be such a radically different species on every level that I just don't know. I'd like to think enough of our current humanity would stick that we wouldn't be omnicidal gods, but... Hmmm... Well, at least we probably wouldn't bother enslaving anyone.

>>2415757
No.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

>>2417253
>enough from our own history that we can't
* enough from our own history *to know* that we can't

>>2417262
There are things worse than death.

>>2416269
It depends how close we are to expanding out into the universe. If it's as crazy far off as it seems today, I'd say we're a curiosity. They'll be able to tell how much of a threat we really are.

>>2416930

Because, for one, they are reading your posts and adding it to the weight of evidence in favor of killing us all.

>>2417311
Keep in mind that non-FTL aliens are probably going to have biological immortality (or mechanical). When you're regularly making ~50,000 year journeys, you take the looooooooong view.

Though they also may be sophisticated enough to know we'll never get off this rock, and thus leave us alone. But if that's not predictable, or they don't wanna bother to check, as we've been saying, they may just preemptively wipe out any life bearing world.

On the plus side, we'd never see it coming, and it'd probably be quick.

>>2417333
We're literally doing nothing.

>>2417333
Dude, if the aliens are browsing 4chan, we are totally dead.

>>2415757
this is honestly a great philosophical question because it is applicable to the past, present and future

>>2416180
To show the dominance of Humankind over filithy, inferior Xeno scum
To bad cucks will import millions of ravenous insectoid xenos that will regularly implant their eggs into hapless humans for the sake of ((diversity)) if our current trends are anything to go by

>>2418101
I feel like humanity would enter some kind of solidarity. We'd find it egregious to consider enslaving blacks, even people on the alt right, but I think that there would be suitable discussion on the rights of nonhumans.

its literally the same issue with animal rights, and we see no problem with eating those so I cant think of a single reason not to enslave aliens

>>2415784
yeah and everything turned out just fine for the spanish colonies

Whatever's condusive to the answerers valheruism is highest valued answer

>>2419590
Well you can't deny that the Spanish Empire made Spain a force to be reckoned with, even into the 1800s. You can see this even more so with the example of the British Empire.

In the context of galactic politics, wouldn't imperialism be humanity putting its name on that force to be reckoned with list? Today, England and Spain still have cultural and (in the case of England) economic relevance that they wouldn't have otherwise had.

>>2419584
The only concerns seem to be with the practical implementation of this system. For instance, importing large scale numbers of slaves could incite slave rebellions inside of a human empire's territory, and also hold back automation and economic progress (in the same way it did in the American South)

>>2416984
>keeping them as forced labor is somehow less risky than killing them.
Yeah slave revolts, those don't happen.
Also it's all a problem of ethics and morality, but 4chan is not known for consistency when it comes to moral values so I won't even bother

>>2419630
There were slave revolts in the Spanish Empire that didn't result in the extermination of the Empire. The large scale use of slaves to develop the land of South America resulted in Spain establishing large-scale cultural influence in the world that it wouldn't have had it chosen to not establish itself as a colonial empire. Humanity would be doing the same with xenoslavery.

IF there is life out there, chances OVERWHELMINGLY are that we are not the most advanced species out there, and if our philosophy is "we'll we're stronger so we have a right to enslave/kill you" then what is the plan if we encounter something WAAAAY more advanced than us? Give up and accept that that's how far humanity has come? So far as humanity is not altruistic and truly empathetic towards other lifeforms, we are still living under the idiotic, primitive humancentric mindset just because we happen to be the apex predator of our shitty planet

>>2415859
Do as the Romans do.

>>2419657

>>2419643
Spain wasn't a superpower by the 1800s, but it still was relevant largely because of its colonial empire. Look at the British Empire too, they were just a small island and should've been an easily conquerable nation, but they were able to achieve prominence and lasting cultural influence because of their tactics.

>>2419657
What I'm trying to say here is that interactions between interplanetary species turn out to be a fucking arm-wrestle to determine the ultimate space emperor then we are doomed either way, assuming there is life in our galaxy

>>2416520
>In a universe with no FTL travel, the amount of resources you need to get to another solar system, is practically unimaginable.
If it is enough to send a self-replicating robot programmed to carry out your will I don't think it would be a big deal.

>You wipe them out preemptively before they can develop into a threat.
The problem is the universe is complicated and chaotic, the act of trying to wipe them out might precipitate some other entity deciding they need to wipe you out or the entity you thought you wiped out secretly lurking underground and returning one day.

>set aside as a biological preserve and largely left to themselves
Let's say you find a bronze age civilization. According to your understanding you know they cannot possibly be a threat and you can wipe them out in a heartbeat any time you wish, they are not going to develop into a starfaring civilization overnight. You are better off observing them and researching them.

>A race that can regularly travel the universe en mass, has no natural resource shortages
Anyone who wants infinite resources has resource shortages

>>2415757

No and yes.

Golden Rule, and all that.

>>2416180
>not wanting a harem of alien qt3.14s

>If humanity were to expand into the stars, would it be moral for us to enslave less developed alien civilizations in protection of humanity's supremacy?
No because there is literally no reason to use slaves over machines except for fetish reasons.

>>2415757
Purge the xenos

>>2419685
>>2419685
>If it is enough to send a self-replicating robot programmed to carry out your will I don't think it would be a big deal.
If you want to wait millions of years for your micro robot to go to other systems and do things, however long it takes to replicate itself into a useful force, and another set of millions of years for it to come back with whatever you wanted, by which time you almost certainly wont need it anymore, maybe. But if you want a useful program, to send them about at relativistic speeds, which may still take hundreds to thousands of years, then no, you need unlimited resources (and near immortality to boot).

>Anyone who wants infinite resources has resource shortages
It's not that you want them, it's that you've already acquired them. Before you can become a non-FTL spacefaring civilization, you have to have methods to produce more power and natural resources than any thousand conventional planet bound civilizations could ever hope to. You're likely setting up planet sized solar arrays to kugelblitz black holes for engines and sticking miles long structures of unimaginable durability in front of them and similar such. The only thing you're apt to be short of are extraordinarily exotic artificial materials that even you've not figured out how to mass produce. You're doing things on such scales that no mere biological life form nor the naturally occurring resources of a single planet could help to aid you.

>>2419854
What if slaves are cheap, abundant, and expendable (i.e. they do not need maintenance). If you're on the fringe of a human empire where transportation takes a few weeks, you're bound to use whatever you have rather than spend ungodly amounts of time waiting to get shit. Even if you have FTL, why would you wait to import shit from elsewhere when you could use what's right in front of you?

File: Ur-Quan_Kohr-Ah.gif (85KB, 485x213px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 485x213px

Who was in the wrong here?

>>2420323
Eternal Doctrine seems to be what we should do

>>2415757
Would this devolve into an aristocracy like the American South though? Or could you maintain its existence within a market-based economy?

>>2416439
I think ockam's razor would dictate that this convoluted plot involving millions of space bunnies wouldn't work

>>2417105
aztecs didn't draft animals though. however iirc they domesticated dogs and turkeys for eating

File: Kukulkan_starship_front.jpg (55KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 720x480px

>>2421643
Spaaace Aztecs.

(Scary fucking thought.)

Rob Skiba and Eric Dubay have already debunked the heliocentric spinning ball myth.

The eath is flat, stationary, fixed, immovable.
The sun, moon and stars revolve around us.

Yes, of course we should. They're aliens, we have absolutely nothing in common with them and we can't even be certain they feel emotions in the same way we do. As far as we should be concerned they exist purely to be exploited.

> Would they deserve the same rights as humans if they possess sentience?
No, of course not. We already don't give human rights to animals and they're sentient.

So all you Xeno-lovers in this thread better go vegan, you raging hypocrites.

Aliens don't exist.

>>2419657
Try to stay on their good side. And if that fails then we'd have to try to wage an intergalactic guerilla war.

File: The-Unknown.jpg (46KB, 460x270px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 460x270px

>>2415757
>Assuming that organic life is even capable of sustained living in a zero gee environment and that it will most likely belong to robotic post-life which has evolved past the need for violent confrontation over resources.

The human expansion into "space" won't be Colonialism 2.0: Electric Boogaloo. It will probably barely involve humans in space at all. Just huge swarms of robots to go exploring and the occasional seeder ship to any nearby planets capable of supporting terrestrial life.

And the odds of us bumping into fellow sapients is probably vanishingly small. Most likely we'll either encounter something way more evolved or way less evolved. Apes or robotic star-gods. If they're apes then killing them to live would have the same ethical quandaries as killing a Terran ape, and trying to enslave them would be even more pointless because you're talking about a creature from a completely different evolutionary tree.

And the best bet we have about there not being any star-gods in our neighborhood is that we'd surely see evidence of space colonialism on Earth had colonization been that simple and straightforward a process.

>>2422268
It's true, once we hit sapience, we went to the moon in less than a million years or so. Assuming that pattern is common, set against the planet containing life for ~4 billion years before then, the odds of us running into a sapient but non-space faring species is exceedingly slim.

On the other hand, a sapient species with no manipulative digits or like ability, and no reason to develop them, might stagnate forever. (Say "Hi" to the alien dolphins for me). Granted, also likely useless for slave labor (save clearing out mine fields).

It woulda helped a lot of OP hadn't mentioned aliens in his post.

File: SHADOW1.jpg (40KB, 507x450px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 507x450px

>>2422089
Yeeeah, but in a universe where life forms could easily have billions of years on you, it's best not to develop a reputation for being a violent asshole, just because you were lucky enough to run into a bunch that were half a million years behind you first. Any immortal super-alien species is going to be forward thinking, and might decide to wipe you out as a potential future threat. Even if they are so kind hearted as to think you might grow out of it one day, they'd probably feel for your victims too, and one would expect the spanking paddle to be rather devastating.

Unless they are these guys, in which case they'd just pat you on the head and say, "Keep up the good work! Also... Want anything? (No strings, really!)"

>>2422349
>[The Shadows]
I like the idea of an ancient alien race sneaking about and instigating interstellar wars and providing arms in an effort to speed up natural selection and thus uplift life in the galaxy as a whole.

I wonder what the historical equivalent of that would be... Wait... Nevermind, forget I even suggested that.

>>2423679
I always thought that was a parable of the US/USSR cold war - with the commies being the Vorlons. (Cuz, ya know, all media is a communist plot.)

Dun see anyone yelling at the US to "Get the hell out of our galaxy!" to any real effect anytime soon though.

>>2416002
Because that's like saying it's okay for others to do it to us