Posted on 05/05/2021 8:19:39 AM PDT by Retain Mike
Blacks and white millenials are being lead around by the nose by their sheer ignorance and emotions.
FFS, read a history book people. (Not to you poster)
“Republican state lawmakers have defended the infamous “Three-Fifths Compromise” — the constitutional agreement by which enslaved people would count as three-fifths of a person for representation purposes — by arguing that it was actually somehow anti-slavery.”
The whole process of determining a slave as less than a person and to be a person without any privileges of human decency is ridiculous. The democratic south wanted to use the number of slaves as a tool to increase votes in congress while denying them the basic rights guaranteed in the Constitution for financial reasons. The republicans rather than jump the democrats for this thinking, allowed the south to still do it, but not as bad to balance the power in congress. Course they were still enslaved and inconsistently treated but not as a whole person. Which ideology was worse, fire or frying pan?
wy69
That is a fine idea. But at that time I do not believe they had voter registration.
Yes. Had some Woke twit been around with their 3/5th is insulting to slaves I can almost see both sides of the argument going off to a side to say:
“This may well be the stupidest man alive.”
“Maybe we should shoot him?”
It was in no way anti-slavery. Slaves had no representation and should not have counted at all for apportionment.
The compromise gave the slave holders more representation than they should have had.
The position I find presented in Madison’s notes, maintained by northern states, is that if you want slaves counted for the House of Representatives then they are fully human and should be free, but if you want to contend they are property they should be counted for taxation and not for representation.
Exactly, that’s what I wanted to say but could not find the words.
You’re much more eloquent than I.
Thanks. All this comes from a 4,300 word essay I have been working on for over two years. Any eloquence was slowly obtained over time and was originally sourced in the writers I admire.
nicely put... thanks for the information.
t
Thanks.
Yes. Madison knew fully “representing” the slaves would mean slavery would never go away.
You may also note that Madison opposed Washington’s proposed carriage tax because it should be apportioned. Had there been an attempt to levy a tax on slaves it would have probably gone off the rails on that basis, people being able to oppose it saying “well, Madison said thus” even if they intensely disliked Madison ... after all, at least with horse drawn carriages there were no carriage-free States so some apportionment scheme might manage to work.
Edit: oh for the days when any limitation on congressional power ought not to be interpreted in a way that destroyed the limitation! There could be no federal progressivism if the 10th Amendment alone were honored!
Incorrect.
They didn’t want to count them because that would give slave States the ability to better defend slavery from abolition.
The dishonesty is pretty amazing, but that’s the left for you.
I had to set an idiot nephew straight about this very thing. He has a Masters Degree in history and teaches school. I told him if he was teaching his students the “three-fifths of a human being” rubbish he should be ashamed of himself and if that is what he was taught he should get his tuition refunded.
“Which ideology was worse, fire or frying pan?
Getting a British bayonet up your wazoo when they returned because you could not come to a temporary agreement with someone you had a dispute with. You are engaging in feminine emotion-based thinking.
Look at the old Ben Franklin cartoon. “Join or Die”.
Compromises had to be made. If the 3/5 compromise wasn’t made to punt the ball down the road, the Brits were going to return to destroy them.
Your thinking is basically that after a plane crash, a man and woman who survive and find a cabin cannot strip and share that one sleeping bag to ward off hypothermia because they aren’t married.
This was pure survival.
when will the Democratic Party get woked and go away. They were the slave holders and racist in later years. Still are.
When will BLM and LeBron James start picketing the Democratic Party?
“You are engaging in feminine emotion-based thinking.”
Nope, I’m dealing in pure fact.
“Three-fifths compromise, compromise agreement between delegates from the Northern and the Southern states at the United States Constitutional Convention (1787) that three-fifths of the slave population would be counted for determining direct taxation and representation in the House of Representatives.”
https://www.britannica.com/topic/three-fifths-compromise
“The three-fifths compromise was an agreement reached by the state delegates at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. Under the compromise, every enslaved American would be counted as three-fifths of a person for taxation and representation purposes. This agreement gave the Southern states more electoral power than they would have had if the enslaved population had been ignored entirely.”
https://www.thoughtco.com/three-fifths-compromise-4588466
“The 1787 Constitutional Convention addressed the apportionment in the House of Representatives and the number of electoral votes each state would have in presidential elections based on a state’s population. The Southern states wanted to count the entire slave population. This would increase their number of members of Congress. The Northern delegates and others opposed to slavery wanted to count only free persons, including free blacks in the North and South.”
https://www.theusconstitution.org/news/understanding-the-three-fifths-compromise/
The war with the British concerning our revolution ended in 1783, four years before this topic was discussed in Congress. We were not at war with the British at that time, just ourselves.
Next time you might want to discuss the issue before you question someone’s thinking rather than tell them what they are thinking. Liberals try do the thinking for us and then tell us what we thought.
wy69
relegating them to non-persons.
___________________________
Wrong! almost too stupid to comment on.
You seem to be rather naïve on the topic. The Brits defeat did not magically make them go away. At the moment we defeated the British in the revolution, they were involved in a world war and we were but a small theater.
They never had the slightest intention of respecting our new nation and everyone knew at the first chance they got, that they would be back. So yes sparky, it was damned critical to get ready to face the Brits in a united manner.
And with the decade they were already harassing us, and our shipping, and impressing sailors. By 1812 they had returned and burned the White House. They almost took us back.
Then they tried to split us up again as the Civil War drew near. They prepped for the possibility of attacking us from the north from Canada, and helped the South all they could with blockaid running and trade. The Czar even sent his fleet to protect us from British fleets trying to attack us.
The Brits spent several decades after 1787 trying to invade or split us apart.
Try to keep up. Everything was not settled the moment the Revolutionary war ended.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.