The three-fifths compromise was anti-slavery, not anti-black. It was to reduce representation in Congress for states with slavery. Not that I'd expect this article's author to know that.
Sure. The number of representatives a state has in the House is based on the number of people in the state, which is based on the census. The debate was if for this purpose slaves should count as one citizen. That would give slave states more representation, the more slavery they had. So they compromised with the slave states to count them as 3/5 instead of 1 to limit their representation in the House.
The three-fifths compromise was anti-slavery, not anti-black. It was to reduce representation in Congress for states with slavery. Not that I'd expect this article's author to know that.
Can you redpill me more on this?
Sure. The number of representatives a state has in the House is based on the number of people in the state, which is based on the census. The debate was if for this purpose slaves should count as one citizen. That would give slave states more representation, the more slavery they had. So they compromised with the slave states to count them as 3/5 instead of 1 to limit their representation in the House.