Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
It notes that the number of the trafficked humans ranged from 15 people on the Atalanta, heading from Charleston for New Orleans in 1806, to 400 on an American schooner, the Peter Mowell, which sank in 1860.
Note that it was made illegal for Americans to take part in the international slave trade in 1800. That's how little of a shit Americans apparently gave about it.
I like your posts in general, but this is disingenious. The Louisiana purchase was in 1803, the American Civil War did not conclude until 1865.
So, 'That's how little of a shit the South apparently gave about it'
I'm not sure what the relevance of the Louisiana Purchase or the South is here. The Louisiana purchase had nothing to do with the Slave Trade Act of 1800 and because the Civil War only began the year the ship sank, and because the article does not call it a Confederate ship, I think it's very clear that they mean a schooner that sank in 1860 that was flying U.S. flags and was a registered U.S. merchant vessel. Meaning it was in violation of U.S. law.
And, as the article says, U.S. ships continued to do this until 1887, long after American emancipation.
I'm sorry, the fact is that the U.S. government didn't give a shit about Americans engaging in the international slave trade as long as they didn't sell those slaves within America's borders.
I am saying two things, 1) the U.S. as we know it now did not have control of the Southern borders at the time, and 2) the article states that these ships were bound for New Orleans.
'Sean Kingsley told the Observer that this extraordinary cluster of wrecks reveals that enslavers had used the Providence Channel heading south to New Providence, Cuba and around to New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico.'
New Orleans was part of the United States until January 26, 1861 when Louisiana seceded. The ship sank in 1860.
And, again, it was still happening in 1887. Which was 22 years after emancipation.
The U.S. was incredibly fragile after the war (arguably still is). Realpolitik won the day.
I heard there was gold in your belly
After which war? The Revolutionary war in the 1700s? The War of 1812? The Civil War that Louisiana wasn't a part of yet?
It’s different today. I wouldn't directly compare the two. Human trafficking still happens sadly but not as ‘en masse’ or without some scrutiny and interference from authorities.
I'm not talking about today. I'm pointing out that in 1860, an American ship was taking part in a slave trade that was made illegal for American ships to take part in 60 years earlier, apparently without the U.S. Navy intervening.
Hows the US navy meant to know who was a slave ship to intervene and who wasnt, let alone where and when to intercept them in the 1860s?
Even today with xrays at ports, satellite tracking, and instant global communication - illegal goods are still smuggled globally.
For one thing, they could just go to ports where slaves were traded and see which ships came and left? It would take two or three people to just sit there in shifts and watch.
And these ports openly engaging in illegal trade would just let the US station soldiers there to track everything?
Why doesn't the US Navy station someone in every port in China where fentanyl is shipped from and have them make rounds every 30 minutes with a notepad to log every ship they see docked, they must want the drug to keep being sold in America!
Cmon its not that simple or realistic, and all it takes is one or two corrupt people to lie about what they saw and the whole thing is useless.
Station soldiers?
Give someone a chair. Let them sit in a chair. Give them a notebook. Let them write in a notebook.
and all it takes is one or two corrupt people to lie about what they saw and the whole thing is useless.
You could say this about literally any crime. That doesn't mean they aren't worth fighting.
And the port authorities and traders will see someone literate sitting on a chair on the dock, all day, everyday, writing in their book and watching the ships, and this will arouse zero suspicions from the criminal slave traders and who ever else “runs” the docks?
It does mean you fight them effectively, theres a reason this isn't even done today with our far superior methods and that is because its wildly impractical.
It does mean you fight them effectively,
So far, you've been claiming that it was impossible for the U.S. to do anything about American ships taking part in the international slave trade.
Which is weird, because the British were doing quite well at it- https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/the-royal-navys-campaign-against-the-slave-trade/
If you don't want to read all of that, this will explain to you why the U.S. did nothing about it-
The Americans made the Atlantic slave trade illegal in 1807 at shortly after the British, but because of the sectional interests of the American South this law was never upheld and it remained something of a joke right down to the American Civil War, slave trading was put on the statute book as akin to piracy with a penalty of death for those who were captured conducting it, but only one man was ever hung as a slave trader in the United States, and that was in the middle of the American Civil War. The Americans were not capable of suppressing the trade because of the sectional pressures within the pre-civil war United States; the French were not willing to give up the trade for very obvious reasons, which include their possession of Martinique and Guadalupe which had large agricultural economies.
The Royal Navy’s patrol was never going to stop that trade, there were never going to be enough ships. The whole Royal Navy would have found it difficult to stop this trade.
As that article points out there were countless issues in trying to stop the trade, such as the legal challenges and burden of proof across multiple countries jurisdictions, the lack of willingness from other European powers, and the fact that the worlds largest navy couldnt stop it even if they dedicated every resource towards doing so.
The US could have done more, sure, but no matter how much they did, you would still have had the trade happening and these ships would still have sunk, and you would still being saying “it’s because they didn’t do anything” instead of accepting the reality that there was no easy solution to stopping the slave trade.
And if I had said anything about stopping the trade, that would be relevant. I did not. This is what I said:
Note that it was made illegal for Americans to take part in the international slave trade in 1800. That’s how little of a shit Americans apparently gave about it.
This is also what I said:
I’m not talking about today. I’m pointing out that in 1860, an American ship was taking part in a slave trade that was made illegal for American ships to take part in 60 years earlier, apparently without the U.S. Navy intervening.
You replied to me after that.
This is what my link said:
The Americans made the Atlantic slave trade illegal in 1807 at shortly after the British, but because of the sectional interests of the American South this law was never upheld and it remained something of a joke right down to the American Civil War, slave trading was put on the statute book as akin to piracy with a penalty of death for those who were captured conducting it, but only one man was ever hung as a slave trader in the United States, and that was in the middle of the American Civil War. The Americans were not capable of suppressing the trade because of the sectional pressures within the pre-civil war United States; the French were not willing to give up the trade for very obvious reasons, which include their possession of Martinique and Guadalupe which had large agricultural economies.
Which agrees with me.
You're never going to stop rape either. That doesn't mean you don't do your best to try.
It also doesnt mean you blame the police for not stationing a guy on a chair in every household for not doing enough to stop it.
You keep pivoting.
Your original question:
Hows the US navy meant to know who was a slave ship to intervene and who wasnt, let alone where and when to intercept them in the 1860s?
I gave you one possible idea. Then I gave you a link that showed you that the British navy had no problem doing that. Then you decided I was talking about stopping the international slave trade when I said no such thing. Now you're going back to something I said before the link I gave you showing you that my original comment of America not giving a shit was 100% correct.
So you've decided to go back to the chair thing... rather than, for some reason, just admitting that yes, it's true, America didn't even try because they didn't care.
Mate the bloody link you posted showed that the British had a very clear problem in trying to stop it.
And you're changing the subject again.
Unless you can provide evidence that the American government did care about stopping American ships engaging in the international slave trade, I'm not sure what your point is.
Because, again, my point is that they didn't care.
Here's more evidence that they didn't care:
The U.S. Navy was slow to institute anti-slaving patrols off the slave ports of Africa—it was not until the 1820 legislation that authority was given to the president to use naval vessels for this task. Even then, enforcement activity was sporadic and largely ineffective. The U.S. position meant that many slave ships from other countries falsely flew the American flag to avoid being seized by British anti-slaving patrols.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_Prohibiting_Importation_of_Slaves
"We can't arrest these people for violating laws we know they're violating! They might only be pretending to be American!"
Imagine if that excuse was made about any other possible American law violation.
I mean I can keep digging up more evidence that they didn't give a shit, but this seems like I'm doing all the work here and you're just ignoring it.
Sad 😩😩😣😣