Shaun KingVerified account

Frederick Douglass born a slave was free by 1838. Published his first autobiography Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave in 1845. Traveled to Ireland & UK to denounce slavery & racism in the U.S. He opened a newspaper the North Star, in the USA in 1847.

He spoke freely on the hypocrisy of US claims to freedom & the significance of Independence Day on July 4th. Criticized Lincoln who didn't endorse suffrage for blacks. He believed that since black men were fighting for the Union in the Civil War, they deserved the right to vote.

After the Civil War, Douglass continued to work for equality for African-Americans and women. Due to his prominence and activism during the Civil War, Douglass received several political appointments. He served as president of the Reconstruction-era Freedman's Savings Bank.

Do enslaved persons count or not? They wondered, before finally deciding to "compromise" on enslaved persons counting as 3/5ths. What a stain on our county, which continues to plague us to this very day:

The 3/5th Compromise allowed for the USC to be ratified in southern states. Without it, ratification would have been improbable and the USA would not have been a country. It is likely that southern states would have went their own way. 1/2

IMO, without the distasteful 3/5th C, slavery would have perpetuated longer and even expanded. The Compromise put us on a trajectory to end slavery at the cost of 600k lives (Civil War). A cost that no other nation ever paid.

Your figure for lives cost to end slavery is missing a vital component: the number of slaves killed during that time. It’s a white-centric view of history that implies the only lives that mattered were the (white) soldiers who fought in Civil War. The cost was so much greater.

The 600k figure was solely a reference to soldiers killed in service to their country. A number that is unique to our country alone. I never implied that those were the only lives that mattered. In fact, I put Civil War in parentheses behind the number.

Yet you never mentioned the slaves who were killed. That is why it’s implied rather than overtly stated. It’s the omission that speaks louder. You refer to slavery and the soldiers but never mention the actual slaves.

Stop this decisiveness lmao

Probably an autocorrect. Of course divisiveness was the word meant.

I've wondered why ppl of color celebrate the 4th. It's really got nothing 2 do with us! Example: why do we celebrate Cinco de Mayo? All my Mexican friends don't which I find strange because we do!! We need 2 wake up and learn true history b4 it's repeated!