I am writing in response to the letter in last week’s edition “What is the goal of Social Justice Conference?” This response points out a significant factual error in the original letter.
The writer is discussing the three-fifths provision in the Constitution. This provision counted slaves as a fraction of persons for the purpose of proportional representation in the House of Representatives.
The writer states, “This provision limited the representation of the slave-holding states in Congress, and reduced their political power relative to this issue.” This statement is a backwards interpretation of American history.
When the states were framing the Constitution, the slave holding states were more rural and less populated than the non-slave holding states. At least as far as counting whites was concerned. A count including only whites would have allocated to those non-slave holding states fewer representatives in the House. Those states campaigned to include their slaves in the enumeration of the population. The non-slave holding states fought back against this hypocritical request. But in the end an infamous compromise was reached. Slave holding states obtained greater representation in the House.
The writer continues with, “That it was the initial step in eliminating slavery will be ignored.” He is insinuating that by somehow reducing the proportionality of the slaves the framers of the Constitution did a good thing by starting to roll back slavery. This ignores the fact that slaves had no control over their own destiny, much less a voice in political discourse. Slaves were viewed as property that could be bought, sold, flogged or killed at the whim of their masters. The abomination is that any form of counting the slave population gave the slave-holding states more power, which perpetuated slavery, rather than eliminating it.
The Constitution allowed for slavery. The three-fifths provision for representation codified it. From our 21st century perspective, how can we say that racism was not embedded in the Constitution? If slavery is not racist, what is?
Gary Latz
Grand Marais
Leave a Reply