Thread by @donmoyn

So yesterday, I became a character on red rose twitter.
What was that like? At the risk of drawing another pile on where I am told I am an awful human being and a neoliberal shill of Big Biden, some thoughts.

https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1367795447365070848?s=20

My original post below, which was definitely sarcastic. It was in response to a fairly specific claim by David Sirota – that Manchin could be compelled to support a $15 min wage if progressive members of Congress threatened to not to support the COVID bill

https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1367683941768040449?s=20

This claim seemed unrealistic to me, and as I explained in a thread, if it were so obvious a “professional politican” – that is someone whose full time job is to achieve their policy goals - would have applied it. This include Sirota’s former boss, whom he called out in his piece

I withdraw, in advance, any unfair characterizations of red rose twitter here (altho there were plenty in my replies). Happy to accept any better terms!

https://twitter.com/GunStelly/status/1368259338305867777?s=20

Yesterday Manchin showed he cared less about a generous COVID bill than the people who were supposed to use it as leverage over hime, which seems like a big and predictable flaw in what Sirota called “game theory 101” in his original article.

You can see the responses above: ‘garbage shitlib” Georgetown professor! Does not care that the staff cleaning my office only earn $7 per hour. (Have not been in my office for a year, DC has a $15 minimum wage $15). Too trusting of politicians. Blindly defending Dem leadership!

No response to my specific critique which was about tactics of getting to $15, which Sirota has doubled down on. Goalposts were moved. The replies, of course, were worse. People spoke with absolute confidence about my motivation, or status, withough engaging with my arguments.

My favorite was the guy insisting with absolutely certainty I was part of a prominent political family in Ireland which is admirably obscure, confusing as to what it is a slam, and just completely fact-free.

Even when I tried to engage with the more polite of the replies, people struggled to overcome the frame they had adopted. That their goals could easily be achieved if only Dems would fight. That politics was inherently corrupt.
A lot of people are angry and looking for answers.

There is a real danger in telling people that politics is irredeemably broken, that a corrupt elite is selling them out. That is the central aspect of populist rhetoric. Politics remains how we get things done. I'd prefer a bill w a $15 min wage, but this is a still a huge deal!

I worry about an ethic of retribution: that those who disagree about tactics are corrupt traitors who do not deserve to be engaged with, but must instead be shunned and attacked. My concern is less about civility, but an ethic that protects flawed arguments from actual analysis

Most of the negative feedback I get online comes from the right, so this was a refreshing change! One common element was “this guy is a professor! What is he teaching students?” or suggesting my obvious bias disqualified me from my job.

As it happens, a lot of what I teach students is about how to construct arguments about public policy. I tell them explain the goal is not to win using debating tricks, but to use argument as a form of analysis, to get to the heart of a problem. These are pretty good skills!

I guess Sirota searches his name on twitter, so expecting the replies to soon start telling me to "take the L" once the pile-on restarts as an alternative to engaging in what I actually said. Really do appreciate all of the supportive replies!

I seem to have disconnected one part of the thread from the other - here is the rest

https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1368261239164571657?s=20

Important plea for civility here: waiting to see if it extends to garbage shitlibs like myself