GOP Intellectual: ‘⅗ Compromise’ Was Intended To Count Slaves As Whole Person

Dinesh D'Souza grossly misrepresents the motive of Southern states in wanting slaves to be counted as "full humans".

The ⅗ compromise is a section of the U.S. Constitution that valued each Black slave as being ⅗ a person for purposes of congressional apportionment of house seats for slave states. Even though slaves could not vote [and African-Americans could not vote (without significant barriers) until the 1960’s, slaves states were afforded extra congressional seats based on the size of their slave populations.

Republican Dinesh D’Souza, who was recently pardoned by President Trump, claims the ⅗ compromise was intended to count slaves as one person despite it explicitly calling for counting slaves as ⅗ a person.

Watch above.

Comments (2)
No. 1-2
Joseph X Myers
Joseph X Myers

That's funny, Dinesh, because that clause wasn't meant to count anyone as people at all, but more within an older formula for defining representation which included property. Americans of African descent weren't in any way represented, not even by 3/5, they were merely counted to apportion representatives. Shows how different the idea of democracy (which was not very democratic and more akin to English Parliamentary representation) was at the Founding ... another reason why strict construction and original intent are not only impossible, they are both bloody stupid.

Joseph X Myers
Joseph X Myers

I bet he actually goes on to say that the South wanted slaves counted as full people and accepted a compromise from the evil northerners who didn't want slaves to count for anything. This is kind of how it has always been taught (the Jeffersonian/southern perspective dominates history), but in this sound bite it does appear a bit odd. But this old argument is full of crap and belies the institutional development that fed into the framing of the Constitution which also includes the chatter on apportionment long a question since the establishment of the First Continental Congress (where the South wanted property/slaves and free people to be enumerated towards apportionment or a single colony/state one vote system -- north wanted apportionment by free people -- the north lost and then lost in the Constitutional framing debate as well, just that was not as big a loss, I guess, only 3/5 a loss)