A slave owner may want a slave who had lost hope because they would be less likely to resist or attempt to escape. A slave who has lost hope may also be easier to control and manipulate, making them more compliant and submissive. Additionally, a slave with no hope may be seen as less of a threat to the slave owner's authority and power.
Probably not all that different to how I feel now. I consider myself a slave; I always have done. I am in a consentual Master/slave relationship (a totally different thing to legal slavery).
Being a slave would feel dehumanizing, oppressive, and full of fear. It would involve loss of freedom, autonomy, and basic human rights, leading to a sense of helplessness and despair.
The slave owners so mean to slave because of their skin color that's why and they thought they were different. Also beating the slaves showed power and dominance over them. And beating slaves, and pushing them to their maximum efforts proved for them to be cheap and efficient. Another reason why a slave owner would be cruel to a slave would be to take out some anger or for hobby/sport, or for some other emotional to psychological reason.
Captain Canot was a slave trader and profited from the slave trade, so he was likely supportive of slavery as a means to further his own interests and economic gain.
the just loved it
It would be property of the slave's owner.
how did former slave owners feel about Jim crow laws
the slave owner would make sure to keep the slave only in his property.
Slave owners wives were often embarrassed and took the anger out on the innocent children.
they went a brought it home. If they went by carriage the slave would walk.
A slave owner may want a slave who had lost hope because they would be less likely to resist or attempt to escape. A slave who has lost hope may also be easier to control and manipulate, making them more compliant and submissive. Additionally, a slave with no hope may be seen as less of a threat to the slave owner's authority and power.
A master is the owner of a slave.
A slave owner would likely prefer to use slaves, as they have no restrictions on their labor and are considered property. Indentured servants have contracts with set terms and conditions, making them less controllable compared to slaves.
He was the kind of slave owner that would rape his slaves and murder them after, sadly but true confessedby him on his first speech"I was once a slave owner but now I regret what I did" And I Suckk Dick God bless afganistan!
no john Adam was not a slave owner
Yes, but if the slave was incapacitated he may have to pay the owner of the slave for a replacement.