Michael Harriot Profile picture
Jan 24, 2022 16 tweets 9 min read Read on X
Maybe you don’t know.

Why is “Jim Crow 2.0” an apt description for the new voting laws?

A thread
First you gotta understand how Jim Crow even started. In the election of 1876, Southern whites claimed the election was stolen. Southern states (& racist Oregon) filed lawsuits, claiming the areas where black voters cast ballots were fraudulent.

Sound familiar?
To settle the dispute, a bunch of white men got together and certified the election for Rutherford B. Hayes in exchange for allowing the South to treat black people however they wanted, with no interference…

Otherwise known as Jim Crow
They immediately began to disenfranchise black voters.

How?

First, they changed the laws.

It’s important to know that Jim Crow laws didn’t say: “Black people can’t vote” but they were structured to keep Black people from voting

Look at what happened in Louisiana:
You gotta remember how many black folks were in these states. In some states, they outnumbered the whites. And in many cases, they outvoted them.

You also gotta remember how racists there were EVERYWHERE (remember, Jim Crow started in states like NY & Massachusetts)
This was AFTER they massacred Black folks for voting during reconstruction. Black folks STILL voted. La.’s new law had a literacy test and property requirements…unless you were born before Jan 1, 1867

It was probably just a coincidence that the date excluded all ex-slaves
But what about all the illiterate poor whites?

Well, if they were born before Jan 1 1867, their children & grandchildren were good.

This where the term “grandfather clause” came from

Georgia now is considering eliminating dropboxes but guess who can turn in absentee ballots?
And literacy tests weren’t necessarily about literacy, it was about keeping immigrants and Blacks from voting. But it was also a way for a poll worker to just disqualify a Black voters.

But there are no more literacy tests, right?
They also stationed law enforcement officers at polls to intimidate Black voters with violence and the threat of arrest.

They wouldn’t do that today, though.
It wasn’t always police officers. Sometimes it was regular regular white people acting as “poll watchers” intimidating and arresting and detaining black voters.

Texas’ new voter law literally does the exact same thing
Sometimes, Black voters said: “Maybe if I vote absentee ballot, they won’t know I’m black.”

But in places like Harris County, TX, upholders of Jim Crow just denied Black voters’ absentee ballot requests up until CF Richardson sued in 1938

It’s different now, though.

Oh wait…
And of course, sometimes Jim Crow areas would just replace entire election boards with people who they knew would make every effort to toss Black voters.

Jim Crow 2.0 though? It’s 2022!

Will someone please tell the state of Georgia?
And just like Jim Crow, most of these “colorblind” voting laws were passed under the guise of “ballot security,” claiming they were protecting the integrity of elections.
There’s just one problem: the people writing these laws have filed lawsuits, held independent recounts, state sponsored recounts & used every measure to prove voter fraud is going.

No one could find any fraud or security problems. Because there isn’t any.

Well, there’s one.
The only logical reason for these new laws is that white people are VERY insecure. That’s why they’re resorting to these new laws.

Usually (even when Obama won), more whites than Blacks trusted the vote count. But in 2020, for the first time, more whites distrusted the vote
And there is no doubt the laws will disproportionately affect nonwhite voters. The data proves it. History shows it. That’s their intent. But I actually wouldn’t call it “Jim Crow 2.0”

A 2nd-generation version is usually an improvement.

This is “Factory Refurbished Jim Crow.”

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Michael Harriot

Michael Harriot Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @michaelharriot

Jan 9
Oh, they understand the question; they're just laughing at how dumb it is.

But since you asked, I actually know the answer.

Now, I don't want to misquote you, so here is the specific question you asked:

A thread. Image
Now, the first thing we have to acknowledge the inherent whiteness of your question.

You don't get to define the idea of freedom. For instance, there is a reason why most countries don't allow everyone to own guns carte blanche; it's stupid.
Had it not been for slavery, 2nd Amendment wouldn't exist in the federal constitution. Only 4 of the original 13 state constitutions contained a "right to bear arms'

So, by your logic, between 1776 & 1791, MOST Americans were not free.
nytimes.com/2018/05/24/opi…
Read 27 tweets
Jan 6
According to @Grok, Apartheid Elon is literally the biggest spreader of misinformation on Twitter. But I'm willing to give the literal Grammar Nazi a pass on this one because he doesn't know much about HIS OWN history.

A thread.
It began before America existed, when the Favres, a white family (Yes, an ancestor of Brett) moved to the Mississippi Valley to start a family business. They initially worked for France. Then, Spain. They eventually secured a lucrative contract with the US government. Image
Image
Image
Image
The scam was simple. They would move near a indigenous people to trade guns in exchange for allowing white people to live in peace.

Now, EVERY CULTURE fought over territory, including the Choctaw & other natives. So having more guns than a rivals meant more territory.
Read 26 tweets
Dec 4, 2025
While different tribal groups, nations and shared identities always existed, “race” was used to describe a KIND of thing

Burgundy region of France produced a different “race” wines than Chianti Italy.

Until white people got obsessed with it racial classifications Image
In 1669 & 1670, the Va colony passed 2 laws

The first allowed the “casual killing of slaves.”

The second created a distinction between a slave and a servant:

The Black ones were slaves

But Black people are obsessed with race Image
Read 22 tweets
Nov 10, 2025
Someone tagged me on this because I've told it before.

Basically, it WAS Canada Dry, until...

A thread
In the days before WebMD, an enterprising scammer could make a fortune promoting ANYTHING as a health product. If you wanted to stay healthy, you needed to include gin, a few cigarettes and some tonic to your health routine Image
But if a scammer REALLY wanted people to trust a product, they would sell it straight to a pharmacy. Like the dude who couldn't sell his tonic named after Dr. Joseph Lister (who had nothing to do with it). He made a deal pharmacist, & the pharmacist sold it as a health drink
Read 25 tweets
Oct 31, 2025
I've seen SO MANY ppl use the shutdown as an opportunity to demonize people who receive SNAP benefits, WIC and any kind of government assistance.

Here's the thing:

I agree with those people.

We need to end the WHITE welfare state

BECAUSE welfare works.

A thread:
The original welfare program began when the government decided to help the lazy, uneducated Jamestown colonists who didn't want to work. In exchange for bringing carpenters, farmers & indentured servants who knew how do stuff, colonizers received 50 free acres in "headrights" or "patents."
Virginia even recorded names of the migrant workers. On Apr 19, 1638, George Menefie received 3,000 acres for 60 "servants." But there's only 37 names.

What happened?

He received 1,150 acres, an area about the size of Harlem, for 23 unnamed "negroes..."

Behold the first welfare check.Image
Image
Read 26 tweets
Sep 4, 2025
I’m sure you think I’m gonna mention Jean Baptiste Point du Sable, the Black fur trader who is known as the first non-indigenous resident of Chicago.

But du Sable was not enslaved when he moved to the mouth of the Chicago river in 1790.

So who TF was buying furs?
Well, remember all that was French territory. In 1719 French entrepreneur Philippe François Renault hopped in a boat in the South of France, stopped in Haiti to purchase 200-500 humans beings & headed to “Upper Louisiana”

By 1760, 900 ppl were enslaved in “Illinois Country” Image
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(