That was a very fascinating read, I'm not sure what it adds here. The US slave trade was color based. The colonies slave trade was through color. And anybody th

That was a very fascinating read, I'm not sure what it adds here. The US slave trade was color based. The colonies slave trade was through color. And anybody that studies north American slavery without being censored by their state is very aware that north american slavery morphed into a color based one in the 1600s. Every example I gave was 200 years after your example, far after this institution was enshrined as color based ones and extremists were trying to enshrine the US as a land for the white european race where possible. This level of enlightnment is unfortunately a distraction and deflection for what this land deals with now: 400 years of color based disenfranchisement that leaves a class-based disenfranchisements with a seemingly 90% correlation to color. If you're interested in this topic I would suggest continuing to study it. Yes as your article mentions, the "Barbary" slave trade was briefly bigger than the transatlantic slave trade, so what happened? Why did the obsession with subsaharan Africans prevail?