New means of making arguments

A great example of the upside of social media. This is an argument made by Noah Smith a couple of years ago.

1/Alright, so folks wanted me to expand on this idea, so here we go. Elite disaffection and the return of the American Left.

As you may have noticed, we're seeing an upsurge in young Americans who reject capitalism. Why? https://t.co/oSfupxLLiW https://t.co/rXiXewB2hV

— Noah Smith 🐇 (@Noahpinion) September 15, 2018

Click to see the thread.

He makes an argument: Systems are brought down not by disaffected masses, but by disaffected elites.

It is an age old thesis and I think reasonably well-accepted though I am not sure I have ever seen a good hard data analysis of it. Basically, throughout history, most trouble comes from either distressed (not disaffected) masses (burdensome taxes, economic collapse, famine, the like) who are slow to ignite but ferocious when finally moved, or the hot-headed disaffected elites (Che Guevara being a classic instance.) The first category is real and consequential but relatively uncommon, while the second is beyond common, it is chronic. The second category of disappointed elites are always there making trouble but are rarely tactically successful but are occasionally strategically consequential.

It is not a novel hypothesis but always one worth debating.

Smith then leverages the attributes of Twitter, not to make a novel argument but to make it in a novel way. He amasses single sentence statements of assumption, accompanied by hot links to underlying data or articles which make or elaborate on the constituent elements of the argument.

I agree with Smith's thesis but with some caveats. His tweet thread does not establish a robust case but it makes a much more presentable argument to a larger audience in a more accessible way and in a more compact fashion than is common.