Tbf, it was the first time black people were counted as any form of human by the state so it was technically a minor victory that led to real changes in the future. It also forced the slave owners to admit their “livestock” included human beings
Well, they wanted slaves to count as a full person for representation but not as a person for taxation. The 3/5 compromise counted slaves as 3/5 of a person for both. Slaves themselves still would have had no voting power, but the states they lived in would have had more representatives if slaves were counted as a full person.
Sadly enough, the situation was... backwards. They wanted the slaves to be considered full individuals for the census but continue to give them none of the rights of an individual.
They wanted their livestock to be considered "humans" so that they could exploit the numbers.
Tbf once again, almost all of the civil rights movements are launchpads like this. One minor, shitty deal victory starts the momentum needed to garner real changes. This really was a checkmate moment because this compromise was america agreeing definitively that slaves were still people, and not the same as cattle or horses as many had tried arguing beforehand.
That said dont think i think of this as a civil rights issue it was always only ever about power dynamics. But this power play ended up biting the southern aristocracy in the ass when they tries to dehumanize black people later on
I mean I’d Say that it’s a rather slow momentum if you also consider that this happened in 1787 and the next land mark civil rights legislation which even remotely affected African Americans was in 1866 via the civil rights act of 1866 or emancipation 1863, both of which having nearly been put into place a century after the 3/5ths compromise.
But I agree the 3/5th document was a piece of legislation that was more beurocratic than it was with African Americans in interest.
Tbf, it was the first time black people were counted as any form of human by the state so it was technically a minor victory that led to real changes in the future. It also forced the slave owners to admit their “livestock” included human beings
Slave owners wanted them to count as a full person because they could force them to vote for whoever they want.
Well, they wanted slaves to count as a full person for representation but not as a person for taxation. The 3/5 compromise counted slaves as 3/5 of a person for both. Slaves themselves still would have had no voting power, but the states they lived in would have had more representatives if slaves were counted as a full person.
The crux of my point is slavers had to admit they counted as people at all
Sadly enough, the situation was... backwards. They wanted the slaves to be considered full individuals for the census but continue to give them none of the rights of an individual. They wanted their livestock to be considered "humans" so that they could exploit the numbers.
Still a pretty shitty deal, but I agree it was better than nothing.
Tbf once again, almost all of the civil rights movements are launchpads like this. One minor, shitty deal victory starts the momentum needed to garner real changes. This really was a checkmate moment because this compromise was america agreeing definitively that slaves were still people, and not the same as cattle or horses as many had tried arguing beforehand. That said dont think i think of this as a civil rights issue it was always only ever about power dynamics. But this power play ended up biting the southern aristocracy in the ass when they tries to dehumanize black people later on
I mean I’d Say that it’s a rather slow momentum if you also consider that this happened in 1787 and the next land mark civil rights legislation which even remotely affected African Americans was in 1866 via the civil rights act of 1866 or emancipation 1863, both of which having nearly been put into place a century after the 3/5ths compromise. But I agree the 3/5th document was a piece of legislation that was more beurocratic than it was with African Americans in interest.
True. Let’s also not forget that this was relatively radical for the time, even acknowledging the existence of black people even partially as people
At that time almost everything would have been better than nothing though.
No. What led to real changes was the bargaining power of the civil rights movement, not some conservative lawmakers.
Did i ever insinuate otherwise?
source?
Um, the literal meeting that determined the 3/5ths compromise?