Hence, there is a difference between saying: Without an emphasis on property and ownership, slave is a more vague term. Which is a shame seeing that property is, after all, the route by which a free person becomes fully owned and enslaved. I’m not saying slave is the wrong term, it’s just not the only term that’s relevant, yet there is considerable emphasis on it to the point where property and ownership are lost. When a submissive person becomes property, they give up the ability to fully own in order to become owned themselves by the simple logic that if Z owns Y, and Y owns X, then Z owns both Y and X. Property, therefore, is the catch-all term for all things available to be owned by free People. But it is essentially property available for those with the money to buy it and use it in some way or other. Depending on how you use the car it will either stay in its current form or be transformed into something else, maybe become part of many other cars and machines.
It’s like a car you own (property) that you drive (function) or use for display (function) or use for spare parts (function). Hence, slavery is one application of owning property, whereas property is what he or she is.
A slave is person who is the property of and wholly subject to another person.
