Changes

:It seems like we might be having two discussions here.  One for the need of a better map.  The other, about who is to blame.  Yes, the concept of "triangular trade" has been weaponized for use against America.  But the facts simply don't stand up to scrutiny.  Was there a triangle trade?  There sure was - by Europe.  The guys we wanted to declare independence from cause they didn't treat us any better.  It's a complete indictment of Europe's monarchs of the time that this triangle occurred.  All we have to do is tell the truth about the matter.  The article you provided from Slate and this other map once again proves this point. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 22:04, 3 August 2019 (EDT)

:It seems like we might be having two discussions here.  One for the need of a better map.  The other, about who is to blame.  Yes, the concept of "triangular trade" has been weaponized for use against America.  But the facts simply don't stand up to scrutiny.  Was there a triangle trade?  There sure was - by Europe.  The guys we wanted to declare independence from cause they didn't treat us any better.  It's a complete indictment of Europe's monarchs of the time that this triangle occurred.  All we have to do is tell the truth about the matter.  The article you provided from Slate and this other map once again proves this point. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 22:04, 3 August 2019 (EDT)

::I wish it were that easy to finger "the bad guys". European governments sanctioned the trade by naval enforcement of trade routes and legal systems to settle commercial disputes; the actual trade was between far flung colonial merchants. The manufactured goods, produced by private entities in, say, Great Britain, were distributed and sold to European colonialists in Africa who facilitated the procurement of slaves (often under local, tribal law and customs); the slaves off-loaded in the Americas then were often sold for tobacco, rum, later cotton and other raw materials.  Much of the tobacco and rum ended up back in Africa for purchase of more slaves. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]^{[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]} 22:28, 3 August 2019 (EDT)

::I wish it were that easy to finger "the bad guys". European governments sanctioned the trade by naval enforcement of trade routes and legal systems to settle commercial disputes; the actual trade was between far flung colonial merchants. The manufactured goods, produced by private entities in, say, Great Britain, were distributed and sold to European colonialists in Africa who facilitated the procurement of slaves (often under local, tribal law and customs); the slaves off-loaded in the Americas then were often sold for tobacco, rum, later cotton and other raw materials.  Much of the tobacco and rum ended up back in Africa for purchase of more slaves. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]^{[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]} 22:28, 3 August 2019 (EDT)

::This article, the [https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/rum-trade Rum Trade] contrains a pretty simple straight forward explanation of Triangular trade; however this article, the [https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/molasses-trade Molasses Trade], from the same source, contains a glaring error. It reads, ''New England traders carried rum to Africa in exchange for slaves.'' The first article reads, ''The New England colonies soon came into conflict with Great Britain over the rum trade as traders found it more profitable to deal with the French, Dutch, and Spanish...'' who did the actual transport of rum from New England, traded rum for slaves in Africa, and returned to the with slaves to the West Indies, from there transported molasses to new England.  

 

::The North America colonies did not have their own ocean-going ships that could violate a British naval blockade to violate British tax laws to carry on blackmarket trade; the colonies were in fact still part of the British Empire. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]^{[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]} 22:55, 3 August 2019 (EDT)

::This article, the [https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/rum-trade Rum Trade] contrains a pretty simple straight forward explanation of Triangular Trade; however this article, the [https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/molasses-trade Molasses Trade], from the same source, contains a glaring error. It reads,  

:::''New England traders carried rum to Africa in exchange for slaves.''  

::The first article reads,  

:::''The New England colonies soon came into conflict with Great Britain over the rum trade as traders found it more profitable to deal with the French, Dutch, and Spanish...''  

::who did the actual transport of rum from New England, traded rum for slaves in Africa, and returned to the with slaves to the West Indies, from there transported molasses to new England.

::The North America colonies did not have their own ocean-going ships that could violate a British naval blockade to in order to carry on blackmarket trade and violate British tax laws; the colonies were in fact still part of the British Empire. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]^{[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]} 22:55, 3 August 2019 (EDT)