Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ProgressingAmerica
The U.S. Constitution (1787) implicitly recognized and protected it through provisions like the Three-Fifths Clause,

Vastly incorrect. By counting slaves as only 3/5ths in the census, especially given that slaves couldn't vote, it undermined the federal power the slaves states had relative to the states with less slaves. If the slaves had been counted as 1 person each, the slaves states would have had more representatives in the US House and more electoral votes for president.

3 posted on 04/04/2026 11:23:41 AM PDT by Tell It Right (1 Thessalonians 5:21 -- Put everything to the test, hold fast to that which is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Tell It Right

Exactly! The 3/5 compromise was nothing but an affirmation of the humanity of slaves. The 13th states had to find a way to come together. Individually there was no way they could face the greatest superpower on earth. The 3/5 compromise pointedly told the southern states that they could not simultaneously count them as population to increase their number of congressmen, Without giving them full civil rights. The way it’s taught in school now is criminal.


11 posted on 04/04/2026 11:35:37 AM PDT by DesertRhino (When men on the chessboard, get up and tell you where to go…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

Oh yes. The clause was an incentive, never adopted, to choose something like indentured servitude under which every person would be counted for representation.


13 posted on 04/04/2026 11:39:11 AM PDT by Retain Mike ( Sat Cong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

I agree. That is a point Grok got incorrect.


19 posted on 04/04/2026 11:42:25 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica (The U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact. Progressivism is a suicide pact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

“If the slaves had been counted as 1 person each, the slaves states would have had more representatives in the US House and more electoral votes for president.”

The South could have easily resolved that conundrum by extending voting rights to the human beings they were holding in bondage.


33 posted on 04/04/2026 12:01:08 PM PDT by Round Earther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

you are correct sir!

the 3/5ths clause was a win for the abolitionists


46 posted on 04/04/2026 12:31:03 PM PDT by joshua c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

More to the point, it was a necessary evil bargain to form a country to preserve the rebellion. Had the colonies split - England would reconsidered us in parts.

The free people did not want telhe slave population to count at all. The slavers wanted the lm to count as 1. Because the slavers ie democrats cast their vote !

The battle has reignited with illegals !


47 posted on 04/04/2026 12:55:04 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

Yep. The Three-Fifths Clause was an ANTI-slavery measure. The specific choice to make it 3/5ths was because that had been the taxation rate the slave states had insisted upon.


78 posted on 04/04/2026 10:06:21 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Tell It Right

The 3/5th clause was taken over from the practice for calculating taxes under the Articles of Confederation. “Representatives and direct taxes...” because the calculation was that 3 free persons would accomplish as much work as 5 slaves.


88 posted on 04/05/2026 2:25:47 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson