4 ms·
> The founders had a very good rationale for putting it in. Yeah, slavery. How would you have a popular vote if you're allowing slaves to count as 3/5ths of a
by kevinh 7y ago
> The founders had a very good rationale for putting it in.
Yeah, slavery. How would you have a popular vote if you're allowing slaves to count as 3/5ths of a person for vote share? They obviously wouldn't have allowed them to vote. Fortunately, we no longer have slavery as an official institution, so it may be time to revise why we're doing it.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- TenaciousValor 7y ago>> The founders had a very good rationale for putting it in. > Yeah, slavery. No, tyranny of the majority. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority Even women couldn't vote, so it's not fair to say that slavery was the rationale. No reasonable person today would say that the 3/5 Compromise or denying universal suffrage is desirable. Other commenters have also mentioned a necessity to ratify the Constitution. That also applies here as well.