And I will, unsolicited, offer two pieces of advice on the issue.
1. Don't call them slaves. Call them thralls, or bondsmen, or some other synonym
2. Slavery doesn't have to be racially based. It has existed all over the world for a long time and has a lot of variations -- most of which are not racially based. And sometimes it's not racially based in our eyes if not those practicing it. Medieval Western Europeans may have regarded Slavs as a different race but we would call them both white. And then there's debt slavery. And prisoners of war are likely to be the same race since you're likely to fight your neighbors.
Re: followed you over from that *more controversial* thread...
1. Don't call them slaves. Call them thralls, or bondsmen, or some other synonym
2. Slavery doesn't have to be racially based. It has existed all over the world for a long time and has a lot of variations -- most of which are not racially based. And sometimes it's not racially based in our eyes if not those practicing it. Medieval Western Europeans may have regarded Slavs as a different race but we would call them both white. And then there's debt slavery. And prisoners of war are likely to be the same race since you're likely to fight your neighbors.