re: The Confluence of Events Leading to O's Downfall

quote:

---

bullshite! That's the biggest crock of shite that I've ever read on this board. That says a lot. Show me this statistic.

---

If you are sincere, listen to this (stats are presented in a balanced manner as the presenter leans left heavily and is overall pro-social justice)

https://samharris.org/podcasts/207-can-pull-back-brink/

https://samharris.org/can-pull-back-brink/

quote:

---

CAN WE PULL BACK FROM THE BRINK?
Podcast Transcript

Sam Harris

---

quote:

---

Conversation is the only tool we have for making progress, I firmly believe that. But many of the things we most need to talk about, seem impossible to talk about.

I think social media is a huge part of the problem. I’ve been saying for a few years now that, with social media, we’ve all been enrolled in a psychological experiment for which no one gave consent, and it’s not at all clear how it will turn out. And it’s still not clear how it will turn out, but it’s not looking good. It’s fairly disorienting out there. All information is becoming weaponized. All communication is becoming performative. And on the most important topics, it now seems to be fury and sanctimony and bad faith almost all the time.

We appear to be driving ourselves crazy. Actually, crazy. As in, incapable of coming into contact with reality, unable to distinguish fact from fiction—and then becoming totally destabilized by our own powers of imagination, and confirmation bias, and then lashing out at one other on that basis.

---

quote:

---

This isn’t just politics and human suffering on display. It’s philosophy. It’s ideas about truth—about what it means to say that something is “true.” What we’re witnessing in our streets and online and in the impossible conversations we’re attempting to have in our private lives is a breakdown in epistemology. How does anyone figure out what’s going on in the world? What is real? If we can’t agree about what is real, or likely to be real, we will never agree about how we should live together. And the problem is, we’re stuck with one other.

So, what’s happening here?

Well, again, it’s hard to say. What is happening when a police officer or a mayor takes a knee in front of a crowd of young people who have been berating him for being a cog in the machinery of systemic racism? Is this a profound moment of human bonding that transcends politics, or is it the precursor to the breakdown of society? Or is it both? It’s not entirely clear.

In the most concrete terms, we are experiencing widespread social unrest in response to what is widely believed to be an epidemic of lethal police violence directed at the black community by racist cops and racist policies. And this unrest has drawn a counter-response from law enforcement—much of which, ironically, is guaranteed to exacerbate the problem of police violence, both real and perceived. And many of the videos we’ve seen of the police cracking down on peaceful protesters are hideous. Some of this footage has been unbelievable. And this is one of many vicious circles that we must find some way to interrupt.

Again, there is so much to be confused about here. We’ve now seen endless video of police inflicting senseless violence on truly peaceful protesters, and yet we have also seen video of the police standing idly by while looters completely destroy businesses. What explains this? Is there a policy that led to this bizarre inversion of priorities? Are the police angry at the protesters for vilifying them, and simultaneously trying to teach society a lesson by letting crime and mayhem spread elsewhere in the city? Or is it just less risky to collide with peaceful protesters? Or is the whole spectacle itself a lie? How representative are these videos of what’s actually going on? Is there much less chaos actually occurring than is being advertised to us?

Again, it’s very hard to know.

---

We are all slaves
Some of us have nicer enclosures than others...

Remember that...

quote:

---

slave (n.)

late 13c., "person who is the chattel or property of another," from Old French esclave (13c.), from Medieval Latin Sclavus "slave" (source also of Italian schiavo, French esclave, Spanish esclavo), originally "Slav" (see Slav); so used in this secondary sense because of the many Slavs sold into slavery by conquering peoples.
The oldest written history of the Slavs can be shortly summarised--myriads of slave hunts and the enthralment of entire peoples. The Slav was the most prized of human goods. With increased strength outside his marshy land of origin, hardened to the utmost against all privation, industrious, content with little, good-humoured, and cheerful, he filled the slave markets of Europe, Asia, and Africa. It must be remembered that for every Slavonic slave who reached his destination, at least ten succumbed to inhuman treatment during transport and to the heat of the climate. Indeed Ibrahim (tenth century), himself in all probability a slave dealer, says: "And the Slavs cannot travel to Lombardy on account of the heat which is fatal to them." Hence their high price.
The Arabian geographer of the ninth century tells us how the Magyars in the Pontus steppe dominated all the Slavs dwelling near them. The Magyars made raids upon the Slavs and took their prisoners along the coast to Kerkh where the Byzantines came to meet them and gave Greek brocades and such wares in exchange for the prisoners. ["The Cambridge Medieval History," Vol. II, 1913]

---

And some of us know history very, very well...

quote:

---

Yale study in 2016 that studied this exact topic.

---

This link does a good job of putting that study in context. WSJ

As someone who does statistics for a living, what people need to realize is that when you have distributed datasets like this, it’s very difficult to draw conclusions. Police stations are local and often their reporting of altercations vary.

So the datasets people are using are much too small to draw any conclusions. They’re often looking at single digit deaths a year. That’s very difficult to model.

The first step to answer this question is to get better data and a National reporting system of police so we can understand what works and what doesn’t.

quote:

---

If they weren't about to move on O, they would have cleared the air by now. The athletic department announced a bowl ban 24 hours after Ed went on the radio to talk about how excited his team would be to play in the post season. Read the writing on the wall.

---

I bet you ton of money that other than a smoking gun coming out of the Title IX stuff that O is going no where. And he should not be. We had two bad losses at the start, then we improved. We lost an absolute ton of talent.


Just sit back and watch, O learned his lesson about his private life being in the public eye.....seems he shoulda been a bit more careful considering some of his past.