If you watch the MSM you're either misinformed or uninformed
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it.
Comments
-
Both misinformed and uniformed and to make it worse, leftards are proudly both and wear their ignorance as a badge of honor.SFGbob said:
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it. -
Watch the videos at the link and look how smug they are in their ignorance.WestlinnDuck said:
Both misinformed and uniformed and to make it worse, leftards are proudly both and wear their ignorance as a badge of honor.SFGbob said:
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it.
Here's the big brain Ibram X. Kendi sticking his head up his ass on this very topic.
-
Jesus Christ. The 3/5 compromise was to unite the North and the South into one common republic. That's why it was called a fucking compromise.SFGbob said:
Watch the videos at the link and look how smug they are in their ignorance.WestlinnDuck said:
Both misinformed and uniformed and to make it worse, leftards are proudly both and wear their ignorance as a badge of honor.SFGbob said:
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it.
Here's the big brain Ibram X. Kendi sticking his head up his ass on this very topic.
Do these dumb fucking CRT dipships not understand that if there had been a Northern United States and a Southern United States, it's possible there still could be slavery? Remote possibility but it sure as fuck wouldn't have been eradicated in North America as soon as it was with a UNITED States of America. And odds are some form of English monarchy would still be in place?
This is Man in the High Tower shit. The permutations of how things could have gone down without the 3/5 Compromise are mind-boggling.
Like we say, fuck off, CRT dipshits.
-
The first time I ever heard this ignorance being spouted was on MTV's Real World in the early 90s. The black racist they had on the show was trying to brow beat the white Southern girl by telling her about what a racist country America is because the original Constitution didn't even count him as a whole person.
That was nearly 30 years ago. This garbage have been pushed on people for all these years so that they now believe that a compromise, intended to limit the power of the slave holding states was really a "pro" slavery compromise. -
Kevin was a cunt. Wood Julie.SFGbob said:The first time I ever heard this ignorance being spouted was on MTV's Real World in the early 90s. The black racist they had on the show was trying to brow beat the white Southern girl be telling her about what a racist country America is because the original Constitution didn't even count him as a whole person.
That was nearly 30 years ago. This garbage have been pushed on people for all these years so that they now believe that a compromise, intended to limit the power of the slave holding states was really a "pro" slavery compromise.
Puck would have kicked Kevin's ass if they'd been on the show together.
-
Slavery as an institution would have easily existed in the Southern US for another 30 to 40 years and possibly longer, if there would have been two countries instead of one.PurpleThrobber said:
Jesus Christ. The 3/5 compromise was to unite the North and the South into one common republic. That's why it was called a fucking compromise.SFGbob said:
Watch the videos at the link and look how smug they are in their ignorance.WestlinnDuck said:
Both misinformed and uniformed and to make it worse, leftards are proudly both and wear their ignorance as a badge of honor.SFGbob said:
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it.
Here's the big brain Ibram X. Kendi sticking his head up his ass on this very topic.
Do these dumb fucking CRT dipships not understand that if there had been a Northern United States and a Southern United States, it's possible there still could be slavery? Remote possibility but it sure as fuck wouldn't have been eradicated in North America as soon as it was with a UNITED States of America. And odds are some form of English monarchy would still be in place?
This is Man in the High Tower shit. The permutations of how things could have gone down without the 3/5 Compromise are mind-boggling.
Like we say, fuck off, CRT dipshits. -
Proper term is Educated.
Such as:
Thanks to Jay Inslee’s bold action, Washington School students will finally be educated. -
People often bring this up to point out that the Constitution in racist. But remember; 1. Not all slaves were black, 2. Not all blacks were slaves. Native American's were also slaves, and many of the black people in the north were free.
It had nothing to with race, but slavery. Stop trying to say otherwise. -
What part of compromise don’t they understand. JFC. Rewriting history. It’s embarrassing and frightening. It’s like we now how 24 year olds in charge of the news.SFGbob said:
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it. -
Yeah but it was a pro-slavery "compromise!!!" How did you like Ibram's kunt logic that of course the 3/5 Compromise was a pro-slavery position, why do you think so many of the first President's were slaveholders?MikeDamone said:
What part of compromise don’t they understand. JFC. Rewriting history. It’s embarrassing and frightening. It’s like we now how 24 year olds in charge of the news.SFGbob said:
3/5 compromise was an effort to reduce the political representation of the slave holding states. The slave holding states would have loved to have counted every slave as a whole person in order to expand their political power. This is one of those claims that has been lied about by the left for 30 years and people have now heard it so many times they believe it.
And he is considered to be one of the left's deeeeep thinkers on issues of race. -
Here’s a good book it. Written by “Uncle” Thomas Sowell.alumni94 said:People often bring this up to point out that the Constitution in racist. But remember; 1. Not all slaves were black, 2. Not all blacks were slaves. Native American's were also slaves, and many of the black people in the north were free.
It had nothing to with race, but slavery. Stop trying to say otherwise.
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436/ref=nodl_ -
Gosh I wonder if slave owners could have influenced their slaves votes......
