I would say that would depend on the manner of slavery. If as a result (assume historical context here) of a war campaign and you did not surrender but were captured, then I would say that you have the right to continue to resist. Does that right to resist extend to the right of killing? The short answer is no. Just as with modern laws of warfare, if you are captured, killing a guard in an attempt to escape can and often is punished as murder. You may attempt to run away, but you can not kill someone in your attempt.
If the manner of enslavement was VOLUNTARY (again, assume historical context) as in selling yourself to pay off your debts (no bankrupts court in ancient times). Then you do not even have the right to resist. You have to serve your time. That is why there was a limit to the slavery.
If you were made a slave by factor of birth, then once again, I believe you have the right to resist by leaving. I do not believe you have the right to kill someone in your attempt to run away.
Thanks for the thoughtful answer. I understand your point about escaping P.O.W.’s. I presume that Geneva Convention and military regulations apply in such circumstances. I have to believe you are not saying that a civilian hostage could not kill a terrorist in order to escape, for example. Let’s say, then, the civilian was not a hostage per se, but was just plucked off the street to serve as a houseboy in the local mosque. I’d say he had the right to kill anyone who stood between him and freedom.
“Just as with modern laws of warfare, if you are captured, killing a guard in an attempt to escape can and often is punished as murder”
Not true. A POW remains a soldier. If he can kill a guard, or a platoon of them, and then escape, it’s certainly NOT against the law of war.
Next, there is no such thing as VOLUNTARY slavery. That is a civil contract, the basis of freedom is the ability to enter into contracts.
Slavery is only about force. Toil AGAINST your will. And that can always be met with all the resistance it takes to end it.