I would say that the context of the dress is irrelevant to the question at hand: Is wearing a dress that says "Tax the Rich" on it to a high-society party an effective and meaningful action that advances the left's program versus other actions, like standing with the BLM protesters outside the Met Gala who were calling for defunding the police?

The history and purpose doesn't matter. Nor does the fact that it provoked a response from the right or ethics complaints or whatever. Making rightwing creeps mad and dominating the news cycle for a few days isn't politics. And it doesn't advance the left's agenda.

I disagree with your claim that this was an effective dialogue. It was a distracting dialogue that mostly focused on her and the dress not the issues at hand, as I laid out.

She's a celebrity and she's going to cause a stir no matter what she does. "AOC gets arrested in Aurora James' Tax the Rich dress outside Met Gala calling for defunding the police" would get more press than "AOC wears Aurora James' Tax the Rich dress to hoity-toity soiree and meets Beyonce."

The former story would send a signal that AOC stands with the very movement that put her into office while giving a boost the the cause of defunding the police, which Democrats have been walking sideways from. It would also alienate the moderates and liberal elites, who would be less likely see her as an effective instrument for co-opting and sheepdogging the left.

It's a statement in itself that she had these two options all along and she chose the course of action that would endear her to said moderates and liberal elites