Essentially, it had to do with political power. Slave-holding states wanted to include slaves who were unable to cast ballots in their political representation in Congress. Non-slave states perceived this as a ruse to exert influence over the newly formed government. This topic has been covered in a lot of writing. Contrary to some who assert that shows how the founders thought about black people, they address the problem of political representation. Since they now had more representation in the halls of government than the non-slave states, many in the slave states viewed this as a victory. Most individuals who opposed slavery simply wanted to count the free people in a population, but those who supported it wanted to count slaves as well. As a result, slave owners would be represented in the Electoral College and the House of Representatives by a greater number of seats. Numerous ratios were taken into consideration, including three-fourths, half, and one-quarter. James Madison would propose the Three-Fifths Compromise after much discussion. The Three-Fifths Compromise was not accepted by all of the states, and the Articles of Confederation needed a unanimous vote. As a result, the Compromise was not ratified until the Constitutional Convention. The Three-Fifths Compromise would dramatically increase slave-owning states' political clout and representation. If the Southern states had been represented equally, 33 seats in the House of Representatives would have gone to them. However, as a result of the Three-Fifths Compromise, the Southern states did have 47 seats in the House of Representatives of the first American Congress in 1790. As a result, by accumulating enough political influence, the South would be able to take control of presidential elections.
The main focus of the Clinton administration after the cold war was to protect
human rights. This was not as easy as expected; world leaders were challenged to
balance human rights, economic interests, strategic interests, and lack of
clear guidelines for humanitarian intervention overseas. These interests often
conflicted and complicated response to international emergencies.
Consequently, Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) became progressively
more important as they had the ability operate across borders with relative
ease. NGOs became more and more involved in initiatives such as health care,
woman’s rights, and other human rights.
Governments still retained their role of supplying military
intervention when required, while international communities such as the United Nations
(UN) took on the role of International Court on issues pertaining to abuse of
human rights.
Tobbaco plantations,sugar ,and trade with france and spain
America and england and nigeria
