3 ms·
No, it is not false. The standard would have been that the slaves would have counted for representation purposes, which would have given the slave states the p
by jki275 7y ago
No, it is not false.
The standard would have been that the slaves would have counted for representation purposes, which would have given the slave states the power to ensure slavery continued. The compromise reduced their power drastically and paved the way for slavery to eventually end.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> The standard would have been that the slaves would have counted for representation purposes No, there is no basis for even asserting that there was a standard, much less that the standard was that property, whether slaves, cattle, or horseshoes, would count for representation purposes.
- jki275 7y agoOk, since you don't like my phrasing, the argument from the slave states was that slaves should count, which would have given them greater representation. My statements stand.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> My statements stand. No, they don't, because they assume the slave state argument wasn't just their argument but a privileged default position, such that giving them something that was a compromise between what they wanted and what the free states wanted was a harm to them from the privileged default and not an inducement to keep them in.