Deleted tweet detection is currently running at reduced
capacity due to changes to the Twitter API. Some tweets that have been
deleted by the tweet author may not be labeled as deleted in the PolitiTweet
interface.
Showing page 143 of 2927.
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
@WilliamHogeland not me, i’m different — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
in fact, the mainstream antislavery position was something akin to “we should allow slavery to die out of its own accord, and if it is necessary to pass laws, it should be a gradual process with some kind of compensation for the owners. oh, and also, we gotta deport the blacks.” — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
a better way of putting this is that abolitionism was one point on the spectrum of antislavery views. one could be antislavery without being an abolitionist or supporting anything like the immediate end of the institution. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
@stephenjudkins abolition = “immediate end to slavery and the slave trade with or without compensation to slaveowners” antislavery = “opposition to existence and spread of slavery but open to a variety of methods for securing that” — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
one of these days i’m going to have to write something on why you shouldn’t use “abolition” as a synonym for “antislavery” when those were two different political positions — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
Which is why how you get this strange mix of rules and exclusions that end up protecting the institution once a critical set of elites become incredibly invested in securing it. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
In 1787 however, there is no elite dispute over the inclusion of slavery into the American republic — it is a given. There is no desire to write an antislavery constitution either, only a desire to not make the constitution explicitly proslavery. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
…who themselves have begun to recognize their political power as slaveholders and organize their politics around the protection of this now-incredibly lucrative enterprise. but this does not happen until most of the founders are dead and gone. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
Now, of course, once the political economy of slavery is transformed by the cotton gin and British industrialization, the 3/5ths rule serves to entrench the power of slaveholders… — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
When people talk about not taking the past on its own terms, the arguments about the 3/5ths rule are a great example, because so many of these arguments just ignore what the delegates themselves were fighting over. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
…a dispute tied to commercial and foreign policy interests that included were inclusive of slavery but not defined by them. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
One thing you’ll notice in all of this is that no one is arguing about the morality or slavery or the power of slaveholders as slaveholders. And that’s because it wasn’t a consideration! This was basically a dispute over the balance of power in the government… — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
And the eventual compromise returns to this rule and uses it as an indirect way to tie representation to taxation, satisfying the concerns of delegates on both sides of the dispute. https://t.co/FXDqQyEn36 — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
The 3/5ths rule comes into being because it had been previously agreed to by most of the states under the Articles in a dispute over taxation. https://t.co/nSW4ofFRdy — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
@TeamQuimbyNH @theconnorlynch there were no abolitionists at the 1787 constitutional convention, and abolitionism as a recognizable movement (as opposed to antislavery or colonization) doesn’t emerge for another few decades — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
Some northern delegates rejected slave representation, not because of antislavery feeling, but because of fears that population growth and westward expansion would give the south total dominance over the national government. https://t.co/AE4dQUIeSu — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
But those “Upper South” delegates also wanted some representation for enslaved people, on the grounds that they were part of the wealth of the South and also, that the commercial interests of the southern states deserved to be on equal terms with those of the northern states. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
The South Carolina delegates wanted full representation of enslaved people. They were voted down by the rest of the convention, including delegates from Virginia, North Carolina and Maryland, who thought this was extreme. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
The southerners want representation for slaves in order to maintain political parity with the northern states. What’s more, the idea that representation was inclusive of wealth and assets was widely-held. Here’s Klarman again. https://t.co/s0QI8hTAXc — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
…and Madison did not want to lose any support among southern delegations for population-based representation in either chamber. So he opposes basing representation on free inhabitants to avoid alienating the southerners. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
Anyway, back to the 3/5ths rule. The thing you have to remember is that this is all in the context of a dispute over the nature of representation in the bicameral legislature. Madison and his allies were strong opponents of equal state representation… — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
but the institution of slavery and the politics around it were fundamentally different in the early republic versus how they operated during the sectional crisis up to the civil war. — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
There is this thing that happens when discussing the politics and political economy slavery in the late 18th century when people essentially transpose the circumstances of the 1840s and 1850s to those of the 1770s and 1780s — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
This fake history about the 3/5ths rule is going to drive me insane. The 3/5ths compromise was not about pro- or anti-slavery positions; the morality of slavery did not factor into the dispute. It was a dispute over representation and taxation. Here’s Klarman’s take. https://t.co/MKpmaSmsz0 — PolitiTweet.org
Libby Emmons @libbyemmons
Teachers union president does NOT know her history. Jefferson, among others, questioned slavery. The 3/5 rule was a… https://t.co/iTHqykvGTe
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
RT @SweatieAngle: Apparently unpopular opinion but the ‘haha I don’t tip counter service, they just spun an iPad around’ takes annoy the sh… — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
@edburmila @mariskreizman if this is the kind of shit that can get published i really need to get out of my own head about writing a book — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
nice of these folks to be clear about what they mean when they say they want to get “CRT” out of schools — PolitiTweet.org
Phil Williams @NC5PhilWilliams
And here, from a previously referenced video, @Hillsdale’s David Azerrad mocks the achievements of Black Americans… https://t.co/WO0Xkygdn8
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
every single one of these stories makes my blood boil — PolitiTweet.org
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
that’s right, it isn’t the driver in the two ton vehicle who is at fault, it is the child riding his bike in his neighborhood — PolitiTweet.org
KHOU 11 News Houston @KHOU
Texas DPS officials said the 8-year-old boy was riding his bike in an area that isn't safe for pedestrians or peopl… https://t.co/BPw15dOVSD
b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie
@davidlsims https://t.co/gpoxLWjOsg — PolitiTweet.org
