I have had the same conversation many times regarding the founding of the country and the 3/5ths Compromise. Many of today’s “woke” progressives, when posed with the question regarding how the then enslaved African slaves would be counted in terms of representation, would have said they should get full representation, signaling their virtue and giving themselves a self-righteous pat of the back. And don’t get me wrong, the idea of counting slaves as less than full human beings was a problem and, without proper context, a necessary evil.
During the early years of the country, while the founders and the framers were grappling with building the framework on which everything else would be built, had to deal with large and populous slave states like Virginia exerting their influence on the young Congress. Being one of the largest states, Virginia pushed for representation to be doled out on a basis proportional to their population size. Other states like Rhode Island or Delaware argued for representation to be equal among the states regardless of population size. Having just emerged from a war with England and having to recover from the lives and fortunes spent, the country was on track for another conflict, a potential civil war that would have ended the American dream before it even started.
So the biggest issue, how slaves, who couldn’t vote, would be counted in population. If they had been given full representation, Virginia and other slave states would have had more power in the House of Representatives, and instead of limiting slavery and setting it on the path for abolition, it would have become entrenched in American life.
Where we can agree is that the enslavement of other human beings is a moral wrong. Where we diverge is that it is a uniquely American occurrence. But this one inconvenient fact changes the entire course of events if today’s progressives were the ones choosing.
A Place 4Politics 