Amity ShlaesCompte certifié

that seems a bit unfair. I did not know his race until he tweeted to me, for one thing (and in fact misread his first lame as Trevor). But for another, political slogans are not the only way to talk about black people, I would think?

my criticism, to repeat, is not about the topic or even the basic finding that black politicians had political successes during reconstruction were wrong. It's that the IV wasn't very good, and the paper was written with explicitly politicized language.

the title is a pun on a political slogan, and it ends by citing Coates (2017) twice. that's not unheard of, but when right-leaning folks cite, I dunno, some pop-rightist righter in a paper, we recognize it as a sign of hackery. Like probably Neumark shouldn't cite Douthat (2017)?

I'm sure your pro-natalist advocacy has nothing to do with your Christian religious beliefs then? Is that hackery too?

it is if I title the paper, "Do Liberals Hate Babies?" and then cite "Douthat 2017" twice in the conclusion! And behold, you've been unmuted for a while now.

Thank you. But the paper's title of "Do black politicians matter" is very different from "Do liberals hate babies". There's nothing explicitly political about the title, it's just a reference to a current organization. These kind of references are very common in NBER paper titles

He has explicitly said it is intended as an homage to Black Lives Matter.

Alternate: if I said, "Should we Plan Parenthood?" in an article showing planned parenthood reduces fertility accomplishment and decreases life-satisfaction for impacted women, but did so with a weak IV reg, and cited Dreher (2016) in my conclusion.