thegreekdog wrote:I'm getting extremely frustrated here.
Which is more likely to result in the freeing of slaves:
(1) Southerners having less voting power.
(2) Southerners having more voting power.
Which is more likely to result in southerners having less voting power:
(1) Slaves count as one person.
(2) Slaves count as 3/5ths of a person.
The answers are (1) and (2).
Except #1 was not seriously considered. It was put forward by the south. If it had been seriously considered, it might have actually led to true civil rights earlier. I am sure it would not have taken long for enterprising lawyers to decide that being counted in a census meant you had real worth, for example.
So, the real analysis is:
Blacks get no count for census --- north outstrips south in the House of Representatives Plantation owners are on more or less "equal" footing within southern states with poorer whites.
Blacks get 3/5 count for census -- southern plantation owners (specifically) get more representation in the House and, to some extent, even in the Senate. (the power in the Senate increases within the state, not between states).
Blacks get counted as a full person -- mute,because it was not seriously considered. Would have given souther plantation owners even more power, but the impact of that might have been diverse. Poor southerners would have had even less power. Might have increased the divide between the south and north more quickly, might have lead to earlier abolitionist type movements as northerners attempted to get the black power moved north (similar to how Lincoln thought black slaves would revolt and join the union army). Or ???