If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Root)   "The three-fifths clause of the Constitution is a good example of the value of political compromise"   (theroot.com) divider line 10
    More: Dumbass, U.S. Constitution, fifths clause, compromises, slave states, u.s. politics, Articles of Confederation, fifths, establishments  
•       •       •

1620 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Feb 2013 at 9:20 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-02-26 09:18:51 AM  
2 votes:
There comes a time when political correctness goes too far, where it is a knee-jerk response, a zero-tolerance policy. The problem with that is you end up not THINKING. It was an instance of compromise that yes, helped enshrined slavery, however it allowed this nation to power forward. You have to look at history for what it is. What lens do you use to talk about it?

You have to be able to speak rationally about things in college. You are supposed to be taught to look at facts and discern their effect on history. Absolutely, slavery is offensive. But that doesn't mean that it didn't happen and we are STILL trying to climb out of that hole in this country. You talk about the 3/5 compromise as one of the forging moments of this country and foment discussion of why we are the way we are.

Fer cryin out loud, the man wasn't saying slavery was a good thing. What is wrong with people?
2013-02-26 08:41:14 AM  
2 votes:
Some things are not worth compromise.

I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to speak, or write, with moderation. No! No! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; - but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest - I will not equivocate - I will not excuse - I will not retreat a single inch - AND I WILL BE HEARD. The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal, and to hasten the resurrection of the dead.
2013-02-26 12:33:27 PM  
1 votes:

colon_pow: the 3/5th clause reduced the south's political representation by 40%.
it's really that simple.


The South was 100% slaves at the time of the 3/5 Compromise. You heard it here first, folks.
2013-02-26 10:25:16 AM  
1 votes:

Arkanaut: WTF Indeed: In historical terms, yes, it is a great example of political compromise.  Just because morally it was a horrible decision does not mean that in the context of the times it wasn't a great example of compromise.  Are there less contentious examples? Of course, but none encompass the scope of the 3/5ths compromise. It was also the trigger for further compromises over slavery which "kicked the can" for other generations to deal with.  It's a great metaphor for the current Congress' unwillingness to deal with matters of a corrupt tax code, over-spending, crumbling infrastructure, and poor healthcare system.

TFA seems to think it's not much of a compromise at all -- the South got almost everything it wanted (greater political representation of its voting public) and the North got nothing it wanted (abolition or even legal standing for slaves).   The only reason they agreed on it was to prevent the breakup of the country.


And that wasn't something the North wanted?  How much different would the House of Representatives have looked if the South had been able to count the millions of slaves towards their allotment of Representatives?  Slavery was a moral stain on this nation, but the compromise maintained the nation for a critical 80 years.  Most likely, the nation would have balkanized, and instead of one civil war, we would have had half a dozen.
2013-02-26 10:05:57 AM  
1 votes:

mrshowrules: WTF Indeed: In historical terms, yes, it is a great example of political compromise.  Just because morally it was a horrible decision does not mean that in the context of the times it wasn't a great example of compromise.  Are there less contentious examples? Of course, but none encompass the scope of the 3/5ths compromise. It was also the trigger for further compromises over slavery which "kicked the can" for other generations to deal with.  It's a great metaphor for the current Congress' unwillingness to deal with matters of a corrupt tax code, over-spending, crumbling infrastructure, and poor healthcare system.

Agree.  Considering women had 0/5ths of a vote, I say it was a pretty damn good deal at the time.


You don't understand the 3/5 compromise I see.

The 3/5 compromise did not give slaves 3/5 of a vote. It counted them as 3/5 of a person for the purposes of apportioning congressional representation. Free women and children were counted as full people for that purpose, despite not being allowed to vote
2013-02-26 09:19:18 AM  
1 votes:

Diogenes: "compromise" without context is pretty much an amoral term.


That's the point the college president was trying to make. However when a bunch of 3rd rate minds who get outraged at the drop of a hat hear it they think "OMG HE SAID SLAVERY WAS A GOOD THING!!!!1"
2013-02-26 09:15:18 AM  
1 votes:

Somacandra: CPT Ethanolic: You're aware that it was the slave states that wanted blacks counted as full people, right? Counting them as "less than 1" person was a northern/free state idea actually worked to help end slavery.

Well, you've certainly taken a stand against TFA, which argues exactly the opposite: " Southerners were able to block federal legislation hostile to slavery and get the House to pass numerous laws that protected slavery. The three-fifths clause provided the extra proslavery representatives in the House to secure the passage of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 (bringing Missouri in as a slave state); the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854 (which opened the Great Plains and Rocky Mountain territories to slavery). None of these laws could have been passed without the representatives created by counting slaves under the three-fifths clause."


  And if they were counted as full people, the southern states would have had even more influence through additional reps.
2013-02-26 09:12:39 AM  
1 votes:

WTF Indeed: In historical terms, yes, it is a great example of political compromise.  Just because morally it was a horrible decision does not mean that in the context of the times it wasn't a great example of compromise.  Are there less contentious examples? Of course, but none encompass the scope of the 3/5ths compromise. It was also the trigger for further compromises over slavery which "kicked the can" for other generations to deal with.  It's a great metaphor for the current Congress' unwillingness to deal with matters of a corrupt tax code, over-spending, crumbling infrastructure, and poor healthcare system.


But had the can not been kicked down the road, there would have been two countries, not one. There was no way the non-slave states could enforce their will on the slave states in 1780, as they did 80 years later. Morally horrible, but realistically, the best outcome. You would have had two countries expanding west, and slavery expanding across the continent. Maybe no Louisiana Purchase, most of the SW remains in Mexico, European powers exploiting the tensions between the northern and southern states for their own benefit.
2013-02-26 09:08:23 AM  
1 votes:
 

cman: hundreds of perfect examples that you could have used and you picked the one that is a stain upon our memory and hold it up as a positive event.


  You're aware that it was the slave states that wanted blacks counted as full people, right?  Counting them as "less than 1" person was a northern/free state idea actually worked to help end slavery.
2013-02-26 09:02:48 AM  
1 votes:
In historical terms, yes, it is a great example of political compromise.  Just because morally it was a horrible decision does not mean that in the context of the times it wasn't a great example of compromise.  Are there less contentious examples? Of course, but none encompass the scope of the 3/5ths compromise. It was also the trigger for further compromises over slavery which "kicked the can" for other generations to deal with.  It's a great metaphor for the current Congress' unwillingness to deal with matters of a corrupt tax code, over-spending, crumbling infrastructure, and poor healthcare system.
 
Displayed 10 of 10 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report