Using my training in stats & poli-sci, I also ran a lot of separate tests to assess some of the possible consequences of nonviolent and violent resistance on media coverage, public opinion, Congress and voting behavior. What does Robinson say about all that work? 6/
-
Show this thread
-
Robinson’s critique (nested in a longer essay) argues: “It’s bad research, by the way, because what it does is single out the political effect of riots in a way that allows people to blame ‘inner-city rioters’ and ignore other causes.” 7/https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/06/has-the-american-left-lost-its-mind …
2 replies 15 retweets 160 likesShow this thread -
NJR: “So it argues that violence fuels negative media coverage which fuels a political backlash that helps Republicans.” 8/
1 reply 9 retweets 145 likesShow this thread -
NJR: ”Which might be true empirically, but as Martin Luther King pointed out, it’s grotesquely immoral to make the conversation about rioters rather than looking at what causes rioters to do what they do. Yes, one way to frame the facts is ’riots help Republicans.‘…” 9/
2 replies 15 retweets 163 likesShow this thread -
The most generous interpretation I can give of Robinson’s critique is that he views my research as shifting attention away from a critical focus on white supremacy to “framing the facts” in a way that “blames” Black activists for resisting white domination. 10/
2 replies 17 retweets 227 likesShow this thread -
Omar Wasow Retweeted Omar Wasow
That line of argument makes at least three important errors: treating prejudice as immovable, ignoring black agency and treating black leaders, thinkers & activists as monolithic. I address those points at length in another thread: 11/https://twitter.com/owasow/status/1271132989364281346?s=20 …
Omar Wasow added,
Omar Wasow @owasowMy paper on political consequences of 1960s protests has received a lot of attention recently. I'm very grateful for the interest
and, when possible, want to respond to some of the thoughtful critiques. 1/
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/agenda-seeding-how-1960s-black-protests-moved-elites-public-opinion-and-voting/136610C8C040C3D92F041BB2EFC3034C … pic.twitter.com/HYEg3MGkZoShow this thread2 replies 35 retweets 341 likesShow this thread -
Omar Wasow Retweeted Will Lowe
But those aren’t the only failings of Robinson’s argument.
@conjugateprior notes@NathanJRobinson doesn’t seem to “care about ‘the facts’ at all.” 12/https://twitter.com/conjugateprior/status/1272624334486622208 …Omar Wasow added,
Will Lowe @conjugatepriorIf you find yourself writing things like "which might be true empirically, but" or "one way to frame the facts is". Or you feel the need to claim that isolating a causal effect is bad because there are other ones, maybe ask yourself whether you care about 'the facts' at all. 1/2 pic.twitter.com/LrNJ9yX5oaShow this thread5 replies 19 retweets 288 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Did you get around to reading Omar's article yet? Because it doesn't do any of the things you claim it does with its framing or questions, and at no point did he offer a Charles Murray-like defense, so your comparison is offensive and wrong. Also did you read his article yet?
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.