Why was slavery ever allowed? Wasn't it obvious that it was a violation of the Constitution?

Why was slavery ever allowed? Wasn't it obvious that it was a violation of the Constitution?

They didn't consider blacks to be people, so no

Well we had slaves before the constitution was written so like a lot of things it got grandfathered in. The thing is, slavery was opposed on a moral stance far more than a legal one.

Southern plantation owners considered it a sort of romanticised neo feudalism, and argued they treated their slaves better than the industrialists in the north treated their sweatshop employees.

There was considerable discussion about slavery between the founding fathers, some who wished to abolish it, and others who disagreed. Had they abolished slavery and made other social and legal reforms that many contemporaries in the day lobbied for, many of the new worlders may have pushed back against such a radical declaration.

The bill of rights and other founding documents were already seen as far too radical by many people of the day, so you can understand why they were not in a position to go too far and lose support in a rebellion that looked doomed to fail.

Relatively true.
Did you ever heard about "certificate of whiteness"?

>Why was slavery ever allowed?
There has been slavery since the beginning of time. American slavery gets put in the limelight because it was relatively recent and niggers whine a lot.

>Wasn't it obvious that it was a violation of the Constitution?
See: American History, Years 1861-1865

1: few people in power actually gave a shit about the constitution
1a: voters were misinformed and kept ignorant

2: arguably not tolerating slavery would have undone the US in its infancy

On your second point I disagree. If England hadn't grossly over-reacted to Bacon's Rebellion and curtailed indentured servitude in the colonies, the demand for African slaves would not have skyrocketed and become the behemoth it was in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Not necesarily. Only a small percentage of the country owned slaves, especially at the time of the revolution, it's not like it was absolutely necesary to the well-being of everyone. Slavery was basically there for the benefit of the elite.

>Slavery was basically there for the benefit of the elite.

This is something that actually should be talked about.

The US is often criticized for the fact that slavery lasted as long as it did. I've heard that the original declaration of independence contained abolitionist language but it was omitted in the final draft because they were worried it would scare southern states away from supporting the revolution. Could the revolution have succeed without the support of the south?

>Could the revolution have succeed without the support of the south?

Yes, but it would've been harder. About 20% of the colony population was loyalist, 45% supported the revolution, and the remainder didn't give a shit and just lived their lives as always. Remember, we fought that war with only like 150,000 men. The population of the colonies was 3 million.

The Constitution of the time includes several provisions that explicitly recognized and protected slavery, you fools.

It was perfectly Constitutional, they had to amend the Constitution to "fix" that.

This. If OP said the declaration of independence, he would have something there. Slavery kinda goes against some of the stuff it says.

why do blacks have equal rights now? can someone give me a good reason?

Because they're not slaves, and by definition all free peoples are SUPPOSED to be equal under the law.

The constitution literally defines slaves as 3/5 of a citizen, implicitly approving slavery.

yeah, but they kill more people than the rest of the country combined. they have decent lives (better than chinese, thats' for sure) and still kill lots of people.

I don't really see why this is acceptable. do we have rights because we were BORN, or do we have rights because we're not dangerous animals?

>do we have rights because we were BORN

Literally the second paragraph of the DoI.

Okay, so charles manson enjoys protection because of the DoI? what about a race of charles mansons?

Because for some stupid fucking reason they didnt send all of them back to Africa to run their own state.

It says we were created equal, it doesn't say they're exempt from the law when they commit crimes. Hell it's specifically the opposite of that, it says that you aren't above the law regardless of your birth.

Every African-American child should be sent on a mandatory week-long trip to Africa at age 14. Crime would virtually disappear within a generation.

what if we weren't created equal? some people are taller. that's genetics. some people are smarter, that's genetics.

so do rights mean you ENFORCE equality? because that's what "equal rights" has come to mean.

blacks enjoy more than equal protection. they enjoy attempts to make them equal.

Come now, I do not wish to delineate a person such as yourself to lower status. I'm fine with you as an equal under the law, even with all your glaring deficiencies.

is this level of stupidity common in the States?
honestly asking

>95% that doesn't have the violent gene variant are killed
>the 5% survives and thrives

You'd have another underclass though.

Majority of Blacks weren't on board with that though at all.

Yes.
You think it's a meme but it's true.

The constitution is like the Bible, every lloves the parts that suit their interests and ignore the parts that don't.

Also most people saw blacks as just another animal, to be used to benefit themselves