Originallt posted by NMaginate:
It was an political/economic compromise between the North and South, IMO, that the South definitely pushed for to boost their representation in Congress, etc.
Originally posted by Vox:
The 3/5 man rule was a compromise between the north and the south. Because a state's population determined their congressional representation, the south wanted to count slaves toward their population. Anti-slavery advocates took issue, because these men and women were considered property and had no rights. They correctly argued that a slave should count as zero. They compromised and for some reason settled on the 3/5 number. So the south could count 60% of the slave population and add it to the free total, which enabled them to get extra seats in the House that they didn't deserve. Sergeant is trying to criticize those of us who decry the 3/5 number as being ignorant. If so, what Sarge fails to realize is that the real story, as detailed above, is even worse: they actually got to count us toward added representation for themselves, knowing full well that we would be denied any of the benefits of that representation. Sarge, you just learned about this last week, didn't you?
Aren't they both saying the same thing?