Many of my columns speak highly of the wisdom of our nation’s founders. Every once in a while, I receive an ugly letter sarcastically asking what do I think of their wisdom declaring blacks “three-fifths of a human.” It’s difficult to tell whether such a question is prompted by ignorance or is the fruit of an ongoing agenda to undermine American greatness. Let’s examine some facts about our founders and slavery.
At the time of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, slaves were 40 percent of the population of southern colonies. Apportionment in the House of Representatives and the number of electoral votes each state would have in presidential elections would be based upon population. Southern colonies wanted slaves to be counted as one person. Northern delegates to the convention, and those opposed to slavery, wanted to count only free persons of each state for the purposes of apportionment in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. The compromise reached was that each slave would be counted as only three-fifths of a person.
If the convention delegates had not reached this compromise, the Constitution would have not been ratified and there would not have been a Union. My questions to those who criticize the three-fifths clause are twofold. Would it have been preferable for the southern states to be able to count slaves as whole persons, thereby giving southern states more political power? Would blacks have been better off without constitutional ratification and a Union made possible by the three-fifths compromise? In other words, would blacks have been better off with northern states having gone their way and southern states having gone theirs and, as a consequence, no U.S. Constitution and no Union? Abolitionist Frederick Douglass understood the compromise, saying that the three-fifths clause was “a downright disability laid upon the slaveholding states” that deprived them of “two-fifths of their natural basis of representation.”
Patrick Henry expressed the reality of the three-fifths compromise, saying, “As much as I deplore slavery, I see that prudence forbids its abolition.” With union, Congress at least had the power to abolish slave trade in 1808. According to delegate James Wilson, many believed the anti-slave-trade clause laid “the foundation for banishing slavery out of this country.”
Many founders openly condemned slavery. George Washington said, “There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it.” John Adams: “Every measure of prudence … ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States. … I have, throughout my whole life, held the practice of slavery in … abhorrence.” James Madison: “We have seen the mere distinction of color made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man.” Benjamin Franklin: “Slavery is … an atrocious debasement of human nature.” Franklin, after visiting a black school, said, “I … have conceived a higher opinion of the natural capacities of the black race than I had ever before entertained.” Alexander Hamilton’s judgment was the same: “Their natural faculties are probably as good as ours.” John Jay wrote: “It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.”
Completely ignored in most discussions of slavery is the fact that slavery was mankind’s standard fare throughout history. Centuries before blacks were enslaved Europeans were enslaved. The word slavery comes from Slavs, referring to the Slavic people, who were early slaves. What distinguishes the West, namely Britain and the U.S., from other nations are the extraordinary measures they took to abolish slavery.
The Founders knew without the South’s vote, they wouldn’t survive as a Republic. And in their genius put this together.
And now, they are being beaten-up for having done so, by people who don’t know history.
Or people who do…
Because forcing that political view is in the anti-constitutional, anti-Republic agenda.
Billy Shakespeare said that.
I’d a recent experience, wherein I left a blog post comment @ one of my blogfriend’s™ blogs. A few minutes later, it occurred to me that I’d addressed him by someone else’s name!
And there was no method in his blogging software by which I could make a correction.
(I did go back and make a second comment, apologizing.)
This reminded me of a year-or-so ago, when a kind soul sent me a few dollars on my sidebar Paypal link. (hint, hint). It was late, I was preparing to retire, and had taken my evening meds. (HALF of the medication I am prescribed has possible side effects of memory loss!)
And I thanked him profusely, using a wrong name!
Then, I sent him another email, apologizing. Hopefully, I got it right the second time(?) I’ve not heard from him ever again.
At least, in the few significant personal relationships I’ve had in my lifetime with the opposite sex, I’ve not uttered another woman’s name whilst in flagrante delicto!
I don’t think? I wasn’t on this kind of medication, then…
I don’t know…
(from one of my favorite sites for such things Art of Manliness!)
Everything from tying a tie and shining shoes, to surviving a bear attack!
What every man should know (women, as well!)
Some time ago, I did a blog post entitled How It REALLY Works.
This is not it.
How coins get sorted inside a machine
The way braces change your teeth
How a trumpet makes that beautiful music
The way pretzels are tied en masse
How peanut butter jars are filled full of creamy goodnessWhat happens when you put a key in a lock
How all that stuff gets into a Pop-Tart
What it looks like when you swallow
How hay bales get wrapped
How water affects light
How wire turns into paper clipsThe life of a dandelion
How flight patterns change throughout the day
And how terrifying the human face is when it’s forming in the womb
(I just flashed on Peter Boyle as The Monster, in a tux, tap-dancing in Young Frankenstein – sorry!)
This came my way, courtesy of Doc in Yuma, a kind and generous friend and reader of this humble blog…
On August 04, 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia:
“In Russia, live like Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, and live the life of Muslim’s then we advise them to go to those places where that’s the state law.
Russia does not need Muslim minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell ‘discrimination’.
We will not tolerate disrespect of our Russian culture. We better learn from the suicides of America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation. The muslims are taking over those countries and they will not take over Russia.
The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of Sharia Law and Muslims. When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the Russian national interest first, observing that the Muslims Minorities Are Not Russians.”
The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation.
If you keep this to yourself, you are part of the problem! SEND THIS ON!
It is a sad day when a (former) Communist leader (now an oligarch) makes more sense than our own elected leaders !!!!
I know it’s politically incorrect, but try substituting Americans for Russians in the above, and illegal aliens for Muslims.
It’s fine to remember and honor one’s ethnic and religious traditions upon arriving here, but remember, this is The United States.
E Pluribus Unum
(Word from a loyal commenter is Putin DID NOT say this! It does sound like him, though…) 😆
Long time readers of my drivel know that one of my go-to sources for life hacks is The Art of Manliness.
When it comes to stuff my father didn’t teach me (because he didn’t make the time, or didn’t know – he wasn’t malicious in his errors) TAoM covers many of the bases.
Everything from how to shave to how to escape quicksand (and more) are covered!
Sometimes, the subject matter in basic, i.e. how to balance a checkbook. Other times it’s more philosophical…
Surely a delicate and difficult issue for most of us.
There are people in my own history whom I have offended, and to whom I’ve made amends. Some have returned as friends, others have not.
The important thing is to not remain in toxic relationships, lest they damage your own psyche!
The JOY of misinterpreting electronic surveillance!
Whether or not you agree with Kevin’s technique from the USCCA, it IS important to remember:
Practice with the gun and holster you use, AND the clothing you normally wear.
If this technique doesn’t work for you, find one that does.
Practical practice makes perfect – or at least a better chance of survival.
(courtesy of Cold Fury)
The Europeans, to be sure, are a pack of cynical hypocrites. If they had cared about Syrians, they might have sent a couple of brigades of soldiers to fight ISIS. But not a single European will risk his neck to prevent humanitarian catastrophe. The last time European soldiers got close to real trouble, in Srebrenica in 1995, Dutch peacekeepers stood aside while Bosnian Serbs massacred 8,000 Muslims.
The refugee problem can’t be solved at Europe’s borders; it only can be solved before it happens, by stabilizing the situation on the ground. But that would mean containing Iran’s ambitions and crushing the Sunni jihadists at the same time. Blood would spill, and not all of it local. The Europeans don’t think the Middle East is “worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier,” as Bismarck said of the Balkans. They will pay for their fecklessness many times over.
And so, I suspect, shall we.
*Thought this was about The United States, didn’t you? :-)
(from Woman’s Outdoor News)
Scottsdale, AZ – August 20, 2015 – Finally, a women’s only online gun forum, sponsored by The Well Armed Woman (TWAW). With the numbers of women entering gun ownership soaring, there hasn’t yet been a comprehensive online community and gun forum created for women, a place where they can share and discuss all things gun – until now.
The Women’s Gun Zone offers extensive forums covering every possible topic important to women shooters of all ages. Women can ask questions and glean from other women shooters. News feeds, videos, photos, private groups where women can “gather” based on things they have in common, as well as places to share their own photos and videos are available. Popular forum topics include the following: Purchasing the Right Gun, Concealed Carry Holsters, Owning Guns with Children, Gun Laws, Pregnancy and Shooting, Defensive Shooting, Competitive Shooting, Senior Citizens, just to name a few. New topics will be regularly and can be added by users, so no question goes unanswered.
Visit The Women’s Gun Zone here: www.thewomensgunzone.com
Great stuff, what?!