Hillary's partisans are claiming she won the popular vote. I’ve pointed out that the Democratic margin of "Popular Vote" is below the margin of illegal alien voters. The same claim was made in 2000 by Al Gore fans. Coincidentally, the 2000, the Florida vote for Gore was below the margin of felon voters. (The Miami Herald estimated that up to 5000 felons had voted, extrapolating from the 445 it found after examining 12 out of 67 counties. The felons who voted included “62 robbers, 56 drug dealers, 45 killers, 16 rapists and seven kidnappers”— Hundreds of felons cast votes illegally , December 1, 2000). This felon voting issue needs to be addressed, because yet another Leftist/Cultural Marxist campaign is developing to impose it on states where it is forbidden. [ Rolling Stone exposé: The GOP’s secret scheme begins purge of a million minority voters from voter rolls, GregPalast.com, August 24, 2016]

While the Democrats can usually count on 90 to 98 percent of the black vote, a very large number of blacks in America are ineligible to vote because their states bar people with felony convictions. Years ago, someone pointed out that a map of states that have this rule was similar to a map of the Confederacy—and that therefore barring felon voting was automatically racist. [MAP: States Where Felons Can’t Vote, By Matthew Green, KQED, February 23, 2016]

See, for example, Legacy of Racial Subjugation: Denying the Right to Vote, Huffington Post, January 28, 2015, by Ira Glasser, former director of the ACLU.

Actually, the regional disparity in rules about felon voting goes back to before the Civil War, when blacks in the South were slaves and no one even thought of them voting. Free blacks mostly couldn’t vote in the North, either. [Historical Timeline: US History of Felon Voting / Disenfranchisement, ProCon.org, June 25, 2013].

This regional disparity is caused by the same thing that causes many regional disparities—different cultures, based on patterns of settlement, which go back to the regional disparities in the British Isles. David Hackett Fischer’s Albion’s Seed (subtitle: “Four British Folkways in America”) says that the South differs from the North in terms of what historiographer Fischer calls “Order Ways” and “Freedom Ways”, not to mention “Religious Ways”, which means that the South has a different “honor culture” than the North.

If you know why Rhett Butler wasn’t “received,” you’ll understand why the same culture didn’t—and still doesn’t—think that felons, of whatever color, deserve to be allowed to vote.

However Democrats, even white Southern Democrats, are no longer part of that culture now that the Democratic Party has morphed into the Black Party—and that means the Party of Felons.(with occasional help from Cuckservative Republicans.)

Before the election Pat Buchanan, after pointing out the many ways the system was actually rigged against Trump—or any Republican—said

Consider: Six months ago, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the Clinton bundler, announced that by executive action he would convert 200,000 convicted felons into eligible voters by November. [Virginia governor restores felon voting rights, Russia Today, April 22, 2016] If that is democracy, many will say, to hell with it. And if felons decide the electoral votes of Virginia, and Virginia decides who is our next U.S. president, are we obligated to honor that election?

Well, the question didn’t arise, because of the tremendous Trump Electoral College victory—although Virginia’s electoral votes did go to Hillary.

The drive to make felons vote is sponsored major CultMarx/Democrat organizations like the ACLU (which calls felon disenfranchisement a “Relic Of Jim Crow” and calls frankly for “Criminal Re-enfranchisement” ), and the Brennan Center for Justice whose blog recently featured a post called Keep Politics Out of Virginia Voting Rights Restoration by Tomas Lopez and Kwame Akosah, July 19, 2016.

Actually, we should put politics into it—allow non-felon Virginians to vote on whether they want it done, rather than have it done unilaterally by the Governor’s executive action.

One of the major propaganda efforts on behalf of giving back black (and other, but blacks are the intended beneficiaries) felons the vote is The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness by black law professor and “civil rights litigator” Michelle Alexander [Email her]. It won awards, was reviewed everywhere, is assigned to college students as a textbook, and helped inspire several murders—the three police officers killed in Baton Rouge by Black Lives Matter gunman Gavin Long, who shot six police officers (five white and one black) in June, killing three.

As Steve Sailer reported, the New Jim Crow was fourth on a list of Long’s recommended hate literature:

From Convos with Cosmo, the website of Baton Rouge cop-killer Gavin Long … This is the title I immediately and robotically recite anytime someone is looking for a book recommendation. By far the most infuriating book I’ve read, but vital for anyone that’s looking to understand why the #BlackLivesMatter movement exists. Why Black people are angry. And why the black father is absent in most Black homes (done so intentionally via the system of White Supremacy). It’s an unrelenting and exhaustively researched book into our system of mass incarceration, which Alexander compares to the Jim Crow laws that justified and enforced segregation in the first half of the twentieth century. If after reading this book you’re still unconvinced that there is systemic abuse and oppression toward Black people, I suggest you check yourself into the mental ward. …

Of course, Ms. Alexander was not the sole inspiration for Long’s crime. There was also the drumbeat of anti-police hate from the MSM. [ Mom: Louisiana gunman would "lose it" over police shootings, CBS CrimeInsider, June 22, 2016].

But The New Jim Crow is anti-white, anti-American hate literature all right, and it starts with felon voting. From Alexander’s website, newjimcrow.com:

Excerpt from the Introduction Jarvious Cotton cannot vote. Like his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and great-great-grandfather, he has been denied the right to participate in our electoral democracy. Cotton’s family tree tells the story of several generations of black men who were born in the United States but who were denied the most basic freedom that democracy promises—the freedom to vote for those who will make the rules and laws that govern one’s life. Cotton’s great-great-grandfather could not vote as a slave. His great-grandfather was beaten to death by the Ku Klux Klan for attempting to vote. His grandfather was prevented from voting by Klan intimidation. His father was barred from voting by poll taxes and literacy tests. Today, Jarvious Cotton cannot vote because he, like many black men in the United States, has been labeled a felon and is currently on parole. Cotton’s story illustrates, in many respects, the old adage “The more things change, the more they remain the same.” In each generation, new tactics have been used for achieving the same goals—goals shared by the Founding Fathers. Denying African Americans citizenship… [Emphasis added]

Now, I’m prepared to be “all broken up about that man’s rights” as Clint Eastwood said in the movie . But I’d like to know more about why Jarvious Cotton was “labelled a felon.”

One of the only other mentions of Cotton’s name in the book, an endnote, doesn’t say:

Jarvious Cotton was a plaintiff in Cotton v. Fordice, 157 F.3d 388 (5th Cir. 1998), which held that Mississippi’s felon disenfranchisement provision had lost its racially discriminatory taint. The information regarding Cotton’s family tree was obtained by Emily Bolton on March 29, 1999, when she interviewed Cotton at Mississippi State Prison. Jarvious Cotton was released on parole in Mississippi, a state that denies voting rights to parolees.

But nowhere in The New Jim Crow does it say what Cotton did to get sent to prison.

The answer: he murdered a young white man (Robert Irby, 17 years old) in a robbery.

A 1988 report of Cotton’s extradition on the New York Times’s website actually gave the race of killer and victim—because the AP seems to have thought that this was a rerun of To Kill A Mockingbird:

ALBANY, April 2— A black man facing murder charges in Mississippi lost his yearlong battle to remain free when New York's top court refused this week to block his extradition. But one member of the court said he remained unconvinced that the man would receive a fair trial. … In the Mississippi case, the court ruled unanimously that Jarvious Cotton must be returned to Mississippi, where he faces a possible death sentence if convicted of murder in the 1982 shooting death of Robert Irby, 17 years old, in Natchez. Mr. Cotton feared he would be executed without the benefit of a fair trial in Mississippi, said Mr. Cotton's lawyer, Russell Neufeld [Email him] of the Legal Aid Society of Brooklyn. Court of Appeals Judge Joseph Bellacosa, while saying the law gives the court no choice but to allow the extradition, expressed skepticism about Mississippi officials' assurances to Governor Cuomo that Mr. Cotton would get a fair trial. And he accused Mississippi officials of a ''guileful affront'' to the Governor. Mr. Cuomo signed the extradition papers 11 months ago, but only after being assured orally that a ''highly competent'' lawyer would represent Mr. Cotton, that the trial would be moved from Natchez and that Mr. Cotton and his family would be protected. Mr. Cotton, 27, is charged with killing the son of a prominent white banker. Top New York Court Refuses to Overturn A Man's Extradition, AP, Published: April 3, 1988

If you read this closely, you’ll see that the New York Courts, the Legal Aid Society, and the MSM were all very concerned that 1988 had suddenly become 1953 in Mississippi, or possibly 1917, and Cotton would be lynched or something. This is the syndrome I talked about in The Dominique Strauss-Kahn Scandal: Overkilling The Mockingbird, In The Heat Of The Night, By The Green Mile

In 1988, there were over 1,896 killings in New York— a trend that would continue in 1989. [Homicides Hit a Record In New York, By Ralph Blumenthal, New York Times, December 26, 1988]

I found a lengthier report of the death of Robert Irby from the Vicksburg Post, from a woman who was a police reporter when Jarvious Cotton escaped from police custody in Natchez:

…a man named Jarvious Cotton, who had been indicted for the murder of Robert “Blue” Irby, a popular young student and athlete in Natchez, had escaped from his jail cell. Irby and several friends were gathered outside the city auditorium in Natchez on March 12, 1982, where the annual Natchez Pilgrimage Tableaux was being held. Irby and his friends were approached by several men, one of whom brandished a gun and demanded money. Reports allege those men got about $21 from Irby and his friends, and when the men turned to run away, Irby ran after them. One of the men turned around and shot Irby dead. It was a crime that had Natchez reeling. Following his escape, Cotton remained a fugitive for about five years until he was apprehended almost by accident in New York. His fingerprints were taken when arrested for marijuana possession in a New York subway, and officers discovered he was wanted in Mississippi. Still, Cotton was not returned to Natchez quickly. The state of New York fought his extradition for more than a year. Cotton was eventually returned to Mississippi, where he pled guilty in return for a life sentence. Cotton served some time in Parchman, but was paroled. He was living in the Clarksdale area, last report I saw. Newspapers: You never forget your first, By Jan Griffey [Email her], Vicksburg Post, October 4, 2015

A PDF of The New Jim Crow is online here —you can search it yourself, and find no mention of Robert Irby’s name.

Irby, 1964-1982, killed less than two weeks before his eighteenth birthday, is buried in Natchez City Cemetery.

Jarvious Cotton, now 55, is loose somewhere in America. If he’s in Mississippi, he still can’t vote. If he’s moved to Michigan—he voted for Hillary.

And Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic Party and the Brennan Center For Justice (sic) want more voters like him—explicitly to prevent people like Donald Trump from being elected.

James Fulford [Email him] is a writer and editor for VDARE.com