> nonsense about how the United States Constitution “enshrined” the practice and legitimacy of slavery <
The Constitution certainly did not enshrine slavery. There is no clause anywhere in the Constitution explicitly protecting the practice.
But I must gently disagree with you in that, as I see it, the Constitution legitimized slavery by allowing slaves to be counted as 3/5 of a person . True, the word “slave” is not mentioned. But the phrase “all other people” can only refer to slaves, and was it meant to refer to slaves.
By the way, some liberals take the above as an excuse to vilify the Founders, and to vilify the Constitution itself. I reject the approach completely. A man can only be judged in the context of his times.
Here’s the 3/5 clause:
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
True enough.
The Constitution recognized a practice in effect at the time of the creation of our nation. There are two oblique references to “those bound to Service” and “persons held to service or labor”.
The first is the 3/5ths rule you already referenced. The second is the Slave Clause - Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3.
George Orwell would be proud of the torturous machinations required to find a suitable euphemism because they were too timid to say the word aloud: Slavery.
But recognizing a practice and legitimizing that practice are two different things. Pragmatic northerners chose to turn a blind eye and offered the mealy-mouthed allowances as a sop to southern interests in order to gain what they all needed - a national union.
Time to wake you up. Article IV, Section 2 is specifically about protecting slavery. If you don't believe me, perhaps you will believe the guy at this link.
But I must gently disagree with you in that, as I see it, the Constitution legitimized slavery by allowing slaves to be counted as 3/5 of a person . True, the word “slave” is not mentioned. But the phrase “all other people” can only refer to slaves, and was it meant to refer to slaves.
A lot of people don't understand this. They think the 3/5ths was because the slave owners considered them lesser persons, but the truth is the 3/5ths was insisted upon by the Free states, not the slave states. The slave state representatives wanted to count them as a full person, and the free states thought that would give too much representation to the slave states, and therefore didn't want them counted at all.
The free states compromised by allowing the slave states to count them as 3/5ths, not the other way around.