Eternal Lotharia wrote:Kernen wrote:You can't have voluntary servitude. You can have voluntary service, but servitude implicitly prevents any revocation.
Nor should you, because you force governments to ratify servitude when enforcing breaches of the initial contract upon revocation.
Then what would you call a "servant" then?
A servant is generally one who provides domestic services, though there is a more legal definition that defines a servant as one subordinate to a master in an agency-principle relationship. Both are relevant.
The hallmark of a service contract, which is the method by which you'd establish the superior-subordinate relationship, is revocability. In all service contracts, all parties have the power to revoke at any time. They may not have the right to revoke, and can potentially be subject to damages, but they cannot be compelled to serve.
In the US, specifically, courts will not enforce specific performance on a service contract for fear of violating the 13th Amendment. Thus, the hallmark of service contracts versus actual servitude is the power to revoke.