1. Looks like @jbouie already deleted his own response to this thread, which is an unfortunate loss to the scholarly debate at issue. 
@jbouie 2. There are numerous valid, specific, factual critiques of the package of essays launching the 1619 Project, and one has to labor to avoid them. My own thread just on Bouie's essay & its failure to accurately portray recent political history:
@jbouie 3. The most notorious example of how the 1619 Project got it grievously wrong is the ahistorical treatment of the American Revolution; I touched just the surface of that here threadreaderapp.com/thread/1163495… & here
@jbouie 4. A serious effort to grapple with the problems of fact & perspective in the 1619 Project would respond to the specific critiques, e.g,
nationalreview.com/2019/08/1619-p…
lawliberty.org/2019/10/02/sla…
nationalreview.com/2019/08/1619-p…
lawliberty.org/2019/10/02/sla…
@jbouie 5. Or consider the @DamonLinker critique of how the Kruse essay on traffic was framed vs what it actually showed theweek.com/articles/85977…
@jbouie @DamonLinker 6. Now, I get that part of the goal here is to undermine the authority of respected scholars like James McPherson & James Oakes, but cavalierly dismissing them on the grounds of "what do white guys know about debates over slavery" is unhelpful
@jbouie 7. At the end of the day, while individual scholars & pundits may earn more or less credibility from their body of work, historical debate is not advanced by ad hominems & closing your ears to voices that critique your narrative.
8. One thing I promise you, the reader, I will never do is delete big chunks of my past Tweets & then daring y'all to find the stuff I deleted & calling you liars when you can't.
9. I mean, you deleted something you wrote on this very subject this very evening, but sure, some day when it's not a holiday weekend with my kids home, I will do a deeper dive. Meanwhile, it'd be nice if you promised to delete no more stuff.
I lied in claiming that you deleted a tweet in that conversation - the screenshot of which I provided - by claiming that you deleted a tweet in that conversation, which you admit having done?
Um...Ok.
Um...Ok.
I have better things to do this evening. Will return to this mess later.
So this was the logical outcome of presenting contending facts & scholarship to @jbouie & pointing out that he was calling me a liar for pointing out, accurately, that he has deleted several years' worth of his past Tweets.
@jbouie Meanwhile, he continues to claim. falsely, that he never Tweets things like this - you can read the column that triggered that reaction, here nationalreview.com/2017/10/alt-ri…
@jbouie No New York Times columnist handles criticism less well, which is saying quite a lot.
@jbouie I could celebrate having fewer belligerent nitwits in my mentions, but the reality is, it's sad. Bouie's a smart guy who reads a lot. He could contribute to a serious debate, or he could sell snake oil to people who don't know better. He has chosen the latter path.
@jbouie The first time I heard of Bouie was back in 2010, when he panned Markos Moulitsas' book "American Taliban." It was actually a sensible review! Hard to imagine him writing this today. redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin…
@jbouie Anyway, "I dare you to look through my Tweets" followed by a block is...not exactly a vote of confidence in how your archives will bear scrutiny.
@jbouie 18. Just to (hopefully) put a bow on this, since Bouie keeps claiming nobody has receipts, the fastest way to collect examples of him calling conservative writers racists on the thinnest of evidence is to search his feed for "uppity":
@jbouie 19. A few more, including one that quotes a tweet he's since deleted. But hey, keep calling me a liar for noticing.
@jbouie 20. Anyway, as usual, I invite you all to read the whole thread & his responses; this is a public platform & I'm quite confident that my side of the argument can withstand the scrutiny.
Also, I may inadvertently have failed to link this upthread
nationalreview.com/2019/08/1619-p…
Also, I may inadvertently have failed to link this upthread
nationalreview.com/2019/08/1619-p…
