government was separated in culture and geographically from the serfs. This caused a threat of revolt as the conditions for serfs to work and live were becoming too dire. There was also a famine meaning that serfs had to give away too much of there produce in the form of tax, circling back round to the fact that there were bad living conditions. You must also take into account the fact that Alexander II had took a 7 month tour of 30 different Russian provenances, meaning we would have seen the conditions they were living in.
Chat with our AI personalities
Your question is not entirely correct in its premise; a serf is not a slave and does not have an owner. A serf is a subject of a land owner whom the serf would address as lord.
The Helots were serfs - bound to their land, providing a percentage of produce to the Spartan state - different from slaves who were owned outright and had no rights.
To become free
The colonists were infuriated that they were being taxed without representation in the government. The sugar act, however, is only one of the causes.
The African slave trade to the Americas and Europe was the result largely of wars within African tribes. Tribes and nations would war over territory or other common causes, and the victors would punish their captives by selling them into slavery. Those slaves were either sold to other tribes, or to other nations represented by slave ships from Europe.