Is debt slavery the "new" slavery?

Just a note: Since first writing the opinion below, I have changed the context of the video to one of “financial debt created by, or augmented by the current attempt to curb inflation.” Regardless, these ideas are all part of the same problem. 

From “The International”, 2009. Paraphrased, “The profit is not in the war but in the debt the war creates”. 

I often think of this quote. War is not financed by governments but by taxpayers. The cost of the debt falls squarely on the shoulders of the employed. When debt cannot be repaid, the debtor nation will need to seek funds to continue social programs; police, army, medical and other systems. That debt will carry an interest charge. If the debt cannot be repaid, it will grow. When debt becomes perpetual, the citizens of that nation will essentially work as “debt” slaves. There are nations that can barely feed their populations yet conflict seems unending and weaponry seems to flow into those conflict areas as easily as water in a stream. Those weapons generate massive profits for arms dealers, and arms manufacturers, paid for by taxes (in the case where one government “gives” weaponry to another nation), and the manufacturing sector profits from the sale of the weaponry, often to their government, which then donates the weaponry (creating more debt for taxpayers), and in doing so, generates many jobs for the citizens of the manufacturing country. So, I ask you, does conflict occur to protect one population against another, more aggressive one or is war simply an industrial and investment instrument? In truth, this has been going on for thousands of years. How do we change the world for the better” Can anything really be changed?