Critical Race Theory

Yes...but it still does not change the fact that black slaves were not free, not worth a full human being legally and could not vote. It is structural racism in our constitution against black people.
That was the law back then. If you don't like it, go back in your time machine and change it.
 
How is counting 3/5 of the state's population of slaves towards a states total population for the states representation not saying they are 3/5 ths a person? Dehumanizing them as property... think about that.... and also counting them as less than 1. Up until 1868.
You're right.

Slave owners wanted them counted at 100% because they had so much respect for the humanity of African slaves. Northern abolitionists who believed slavery to be immoral were the evil-doers.

Idiot.
 
Last edited:
Your right.

Slave owners wanted them counted at 100% because they had so much respect for the humanity of African slaves. Northern abolitionists who believed slavery to be immoral were the evil-doers.

Idiot.
Good grief...you guys are stupid....of course the Southern Slave owners wanted to count the votes of black slaves...that gave them more power and their votes counted more than their northern counterparts....this structural racism still exists today as it was baked in to our imperfect constitution.
 
Truly amazing how fools have zero understanding of the 3/5 slave count…
How many times does this have to be addressed?
Answer: Forever because idiots will never understand why 3/5 was put into the Constitution.

Northern States did not want to count ANY slave as the population because they were not free.
Southern states wanted to count every slave as part of the population.
So why would southern states at the time what this? Because i would have given them more reps in Congress thus more power..
If the south would have gotten their way who knows how much longer slavery would have lasted?
Exactly! The 3/5 lessened slave states representation in congress. Without it, slavery may have lasted until the first world war.
 
Good grief...you guys are stupid....of course the Southern Slave owners wanted to count the votes of black slaves...that gave them more power and their votes counted more than their northern counterparts....this structural racism still exists today as it was baked in to our imperfect constitution.
You are an idiot. 3/5 was the first shot fired by abolishinists. The level of thinking that went into minimizing slave state representation is far too advanced for simple minds such as you.
 
Your right.

Slave owners wanted them counted at 100% because they had so much respect for the humanity of African slaves. Northern abolitionists who believed slavery to be immoral were the evil-doers.

Idiot.
So, my post said nothing like that, but since you brought it up. The only compromise should have been. Get rid of slavery! Don't try and make it like the Northern Abolitionists are some sort of hero's. Compromising that slaves would count as 3/5 was terrible. Even if it was well intended, it was terrible. The Abolitionists failed miserably.

You are an idiot. 3/5 was the first shot fired by abolishinists. The level of thinking that went into minimizing slave state representation is far too advanced for simple minds such as you.
and 74 years later when all those Abolitionists were dead, a war had to be fought. Nice Shot. It only took about 100 years. Please explain how counting slaves as part of the population to give those states more representation was a good move?
 
So, my post said nothing like that, but since you brought it up. The only compromise should have been. Get rid of slavery! Don't try and make it like the Northern Abolitionists are some sort of hero's. Compromising that slaves would count as 3/5 was terrible. Even if it was well intended, it was terrible. The Abolitionists failed miserably.


and 74 years later when all those Abolitionists were dead, a war had to be fought. Nice Shot. It only took about 100 years. Please explain how counting slaves as part of the population to give those states more representation was a good move?
Are you dumb? They were not counted as whole people to limit the representation of the slave states. Good lord you people. 3/5 was the first step, the underground railroad was next, then the war and the emancipation proclamation. How little you people know about the history of this country is shocking, yet, not surprising.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, my post said nothing like that, but since you brought it up. The only compromise should have been. Get rid of slavery! Don't try and make it like the Northern Abolitionists are some sort of hero's. Compromising that slaves would count as 3/5 was terrible. Even if it was well intended, it was terrible. The Abolitionists failed miserably.


and 74 years later when all those Abolitionists were dead, a war had to be fought. Nice Shot. It only took about 100 years. Please explain how counting slaves as part of the population to give those states more representation was a good move?
Idiot.
 
Are you dumb? They were not counted as whole people to limit the representation of the slave states. Good lord you people. 3/5 was the first step, the underground railroad was next, then the war and the emancipation proclamation. How little you people know about the history of this country is shocking, yet, not surprising.
No, I'm not dumb. You are though. It was all about power and taxes. You guys are making a real good argument for CRT.

Only took about 625,000 dead Soldiers. 625,000 dead Americans seems about right for you guys. 3/5 was a really bad first step. I'm embarassed that you are a human being. You really need to stop.
 
No, I'm not dumb. You are though. It was all about power and taxes. You guys are making a real good argument for CRT.

Only took about 625,000 dead Soldiers. 625,000 dead Americans seems about right for you guys. 3/5 was a really bad first step. I'm embarassed that you are a human being. You really need to stop.
Again, your knowledge of history is strikingly low. And those war dead? My ancestors were among them as they also were in The Revolution, The Trail of Tears and both World Wars. What about you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, your knowledge of history is strikingly low. And those war dead? My ancestors were among them as they also were in The Revolution, The Trail of Tears and both Wirld Wars. What about you?
So, what is your opinion of the Indian Removal Act? I assume that since your ancestors were part of the Trail of Tears, that you are of Native American Descent. Your picture seems to indicate that as well. Are you Cherokee? Seminole? Were your ancestors slave owners?

Another terrible act. Seems to have worked out good for Native Americans though.
 
How is counting 3/5 of the state's population of slaves towards a states total population for the states representation not saying they are 3/5 ths a person? Dehumanizing them as property... think about that.... and also counting them as less than 1. Up until 1868.

Thank you for proving my point. We can now move you from simply being ignorant of history to simply being stupid.
 
So, what is your opinion of the Indian Removal Act? I assume that since your ancestors were part of the Trail of Tears, that you are of Native American Descent. Your picture seems to indicate that as well. Are you Cherokee? Seminole? Were your ancestors slave owners?

Another terrible act. Seems to have worked out good for Native Americans though.
I'm 49.8% Cherokee and the Indian Removal Act was dastardly. However, The Cherokee only went to court but did nothing else to stop it. The Seminoles fought back as they all should have.

The Native American tribes today are embarrassing. Their plight, like that of the African American community, is of their own doing.
 
Good grief...you guys are stupid....of course the Southern Slave owners wanted to count the votes of black slaves...that gave them more power and their votes counted more than their northern counterparts....this structural racism still exists today as it was baked in to our imperfect constitution.

Truly amazing.. you had the first part correct.. then you had to keep typing…
The racism was baked out of the constitution with the 13, 14 and 15th amendments.
There is no systemic racism that is produced from the constitution today.
Any government body within the sovereign boundaries of the US are required under the law of the land to treat all citizens with equal justice under the law…
Is this law of the land ever broken? Yes.. there are too many examples unfortunately … Civil asset forfeiture would be a prime example.
 
No, I'm not dumb. You are though. It was all about power and taxes. You guys are making a real good argument for CRT.

Only took about 625,000 dead Soldiers. 625,000 dead Americans seems about right for you guys.
1. You don't know what CRT is.

2. The Civil War might have been avoided if the DEMOCRATS had not been so insistent upon protecting and expanding slavery.
 
1. You don't know what CRT is.

2. The Civil War might have been avoided if the DEMOCRATS had not been so insistent upon protecting and expanding slavery.
Right. Psycho said "Only took about 625,000 dead Soldiers. 625,000 dead Americans seems about right for you guys." Really? As CHS said, the DEMOCRATS caused the Civil War. Also, who was president when WW1 started? WW2? Korea? Vietnam?...Seems to be a pattern with YOU GUYS psycho.
 
Right. Psycho said "Only took about 625,000 dead Soldiers. 625,000 dead Americans seems about right for you guys." Really? As CHS said, the DEMOCRATS caused the Civil War. Also, who was president when WW1 started? WW2? Korea? Vietnam?...Seems to be a pattern with YOU GUYS psycho.
So, you guys think the two parties are even close to what they once were?
 
So, you guys think the two parties are even close to what they once were?
We have discussed the realignment of the political party on civil rights...it has been exhausted some folks either too stupid or just want to pretend history did not happen...hence the made up hysteria on CRT
 
listen to Jason


By the time Jones and the Peoples Temple established their headquarters in San Francisco, Jones felt comfortable enough to fully unveil his true agenda, communism. He disavowed Christianity and the Bible. He argued the Bible was a weapon used to oppress black people and women. He preached that America was irredeemably racist and fascist.

Jones became a major player in Democratic politics. He helped George Moscone win election as San Francisco's mayor. Jones counseled Vice President Walter Mondale and first lady Rosalynn Carter. Jones befriended Kamala Harris mentor and lover Willie Brown. California Governor Jerry Brown said Jones was Martin Luther King Jr., Albert Einstein, Angela Davis, and Chinese communist revolutionary Chairman Mao rolled into one.

Jim Jones used the Black Lives Matter formula 50 years ago. When you refuse to learn from history, you repeat it.
 
Last edited:
We have discussed the realignment of the political party on civil rights...it has been exhausted some folks either too stupid or just want to pretend history did not happen...hence the made up hysteria on CRT
Does it hurt being brainwashed? You have never answered this Slap Nuts
 
It is mainstream history you racist old loon.
Age discrimination along with all your other bigotry. Nice slappy.

But No, FACTUAL history is not on your side. It is never on the side of Democrats...Nothing but racist, hate filled, war mongering liars.
 
Top