I Don't Unnerstan

The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.

--Morpheus The Matrix 

GURPS: Basic Set 4th Edition Revised p. 518-519 says:

Loyalty
We offer no "loyalty table" for enslaved individuals; the GM must use common sense. The orcs' victims will escape or revolt at any opportunity, except for those too will-broken to make a move. The Janissary will shout, "Traitor!" and try to arrest anyone who attempts to "free" him.

GURPS: Basic Set 4th Edition, Vol. 2, Campaigns p. 518-519 says:

Loyalty of Slaves
Determine a slave’s loyalty per Loyalty of Hirelings (above). However, slaves are less predictable than hirelings. After determining the slave’s initial loyalty, roll 2d on the following table to determine a loyalty modifier:

• 2-7 – No modifier.
• 8 – He was enslaved for some crime, and resents it: -1 to loyalty.
• 9 – As above, but -2 to loyalty.
• 10 – His previous master was very cruel. If he is treated with kindness during the first week, apply +2 to loyalty; otherwise, no change.
• 11 – He has a fanatic hatred of slavery.  If treated well, he may like his masters as people, but will still escape as soon as possible. If treated badly (or even “average” for a slave), his loyalty drops to 6.
• 12 – He has the Slave Mentality disadvantage (p. 154), and considers himself truly the property of his owner. His loyalty is automatically 20. You need never check loyalty; he will not demur, even if given orders that condemn him to death.

Make loyalty checks for slaves as for any other hirelings. Modify loyalty by +1 or +2 if they are in a situation where they have nowhere to run! 

And I wonder why this change was made.  Their whole point about the changes they make to slavery is about how it's dehumanizing and the players should be the heroes who oppose the very idea of it, but this is a table of very human responses to being enslaved in most places.

Making me work it out on my own as the GM does work, and I've been doing it that way since forever because I never looked for this table.

Still, how does this table convince someone that slavery is OK? 

The old version says:

Legal Complications
When slave-holding PCs enter an area where slavery is illegal, they must either dispose of their slaves or pass them off as free servants.

Possible anti-slavery attitudes include: legal to own slaves, but not to buy or sell them locally; legal for non-citizens to own slaves while passing through, but illegal for permanent residents to own them; or illegal to own slaves at all.

A creative GM may impose other laws and customs regarding slavery.  For instance, it might be legal to enslave members of some social groups or races, but not others. There might be ways for a slave to earn his freedom – some societies might even permit slaves to own property and buy their freedom. 

Eliminating the players owning slaves meshes with the idea of them as the heroes, but the rest is decent, generic, campaign guidance.

The new version is much shorter.

Social Complications
No one from an even vaguely egalitarian society likes those who enslave others or profit from it; they will react at -1 or worse. Enslavers are usually overtly Callous (p. 125).

Where the practice is illegal, they have Social Stigma (Criminal Record) (p. 155), and are treated as if they had Sadism (p. 152) – even if they don’t.  Exception: The masters of zombies, golems, IQ 3 tentacle beasts, and similar “pets” instead suffer the usual reaction penalties of necromancers or keepers of horrors, and may even inherit the creatures’ penalties!

I like this verbiage.  Adding it to the original would have been better, I think, than dodging the idea that slaves can be broken to the point that they have come to completely accept their lot even if they aren't happy about it.