4 ms·

Ok, 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 s

by jki275 7y ago

Ok, 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.
- jki275 7y ago
  That's what we call word salad.
- jki275 7y ago
  To be clear, there was no "privileged default", the "default" was that everyone counted. The 3/5 compromise was forced on the slave states to reduce their power from the default. It was not an "inducement", they were forced into it.