That’s right.
When the 3/5th’s rule was implemented for the purposes of taxation the south squealed. They didn’t want their blacks to be a part of the count (and thus the apportioned tax). For the purposes of taxation the south didn’t want the blacks to hold any value at all.
But for the purposes of representation they were again angry because this time they wanted their blacks to be counted as a whole person - but without a single human right of course.
It’s funny how the slavers managed to run their hypocrisy both ways.
Representation had nothing to do with “human rights.” But of course, the slaves did have “human rights.” State laws recognized them as humans and for some purposes even legal persons. At the same time, they were chattel property, and so more like criminals sentenced for a lifetime of hard labor. Notice that the 13th Amendment does not use the term “slavery.” but “involuntary servitude.”