This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
There is a reasonable argument to be made that the actions taken by the Trump administration to pay El Salvadorian work prisons to take individuals who, in the United States were not convicted of any crime, without due process, would constitute resumption of the international slave trade.
This is substantiated with news sources which explicitly make this claim "By effectively subsidizing and populating a modern penal colony, Trump has reignited the international slave trade. The United States will profit from this deal, too."
https://www.thenation.com/article/society/trump-human-trafficking-el-salvador/
I believe that the possibility of adding section to this article to discuss the apparent modern resurrection of international slave sales by the Trump administration merits a new section to this article. -- Anthony S. Castanza (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"This article is about slavery from the founding of the United States in 1776. For the colonial period, see Slavery in the colonial history of the United States. For modern illegal slavery, see Human trafficking in the United States. For modern legal forced labor, see Penal labor in the United States."
That is inconsistent with the description of the article, which does not set a formal end-date for the relevant conduct. The informal end date of 1865 is not for article scope reasons, but purely because that until this administration the United States had ceased trading in slaves. This conduct could be appropriate to the Human Trafficking article, however, that is typically understood to be criminal conduct by non-state actors. The United States government seizing individuals off the street with no legal process, and selling them to a forced labor facility in an independent nation most closely falls under the type of chattel slavery discussed in this article. Furthermore the Penal Labor article is not appropriate as it is scoped to "legal forced labor" - of which selling individuals to a foreign nation is not. Perhaps there is a more appropriate article to discuss this conduct. But so far, I believe that this is, in fact, the most appropriate one. -- Anthony S. Castanza (talk) 20:16, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Years ago someone inserted material to the effect that Manasseh Cutler and another man were responsible for the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. The extensive scholarly literature is ignored. Historians have been puzzled why the southern slaveholders who controlled the Continental Congress almost unanimously passed a provision to outlaw slavery in the Northwest Territory. (There was one negative vote, by a New Yorker.) Scholars are pretty well agreed with [[Ray Allen Billington]] ''Westward expansion: history of the American frontier''. 4th edition 1974 page 211 that "Cutler and his fellow land-jobbers had nothing to do with shaping the Ordinance." Rjensen (talk) 05:14, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
