RIP, I guess?
-
When I read it, my first thought, as well, was that the watershed moment might have been Rodney King, rather than OJ. There's an interview with one of the jurors who said that they were "90% sure" that OJ was guilty, but this was "revenge."
I was in the OR lounge when the verdict was announced. My observations of the reactions of the people in the lounge as similar to what he says.
As far as DEI, yeah, but...I see it as a sideways path to "reparations."
-
@George-K said in RIP, I guess?:
Couple takes from a blog:
"OJ Died today...
...And he died on the same day as the guy who murdered his wife and Ron Goldman, how's that for a coincidence?
My 19 YO son asked me about the trial and what it meant, and this is what I told him. “The racial rot in this country goes back to that trial. By the 90s, racism was dead. Nobody cared anymore. Oh, there were scattered individual racists, there always will be, but we had racism beaten as a society. But the race hustlers were realizing that if we had beaten racism, their gravy train was derailing. So they cast the trial as being about OJ being black, and not about whether he had killed 2 people.
I watched the trial with my boss at the time. He was a black man, college educated, upper middle class, whom I'd known for a couple of years, and I don't think the subject of race ever came up between us. Like I said, nobody cared. We were work friends. When the verdict was read, he stood and cheered. I just stared at him. I didn't understand then that if there was no significant racism in America, there was no need for the race hustlers. I draw a direct line from that trial to the DEI madness that's ripping this country apart today. And the race hustlers are richer than ever."
The blogger is mistaken. The OJ trial was only 30 years since the Selma March, 20 years since the Black Panthers came to prominence, 15 years since Biden was openly worrying about racial jungles, and (most importantly) only 3 years after Rodney King and the riots. Rodney King set the stage for the racial tensions over OJ .
I will agree that progress had been made and continued to be made up and until 2008. But there were underlying problems happening simultaneously. The destruction of the Black family unit…
Blaming the OJ trial for the rise of DEI is ridiculous, IMO.
@LuFins-Dad said in RIP, I guess?:
@George-K said in RIP, I guess?:
Couple takes from a blog:
"OJ Died today...
...And he died on the same day as the guy who murdered his wife and Ron Goldman, how's that for a coincidence?
My 19 YO son asked me about the trial and what it meant, and this is what I told him. “The racial rot in this country goes back to that trial. By the 90s, racism was dead. Nobody cared anymore. Oh, there were scattered individual racists, there always will be, but we had racism beaten as a society. But the race hustlers were realizing that if we had beaten racism, their gravy train was derailing. So they cast the trial as being about OJ being black, and not about whether he had killed 2 people.
I watched the trial with my boss at the time. He was a black man, college educated, upper middle class, whom I'd known for a couple of years, and I don't think the subject of race ever came up between us. Like I said, nobody cared. We were work friends. When the verdict was read, he stood and cheered. I just stared at him. I didn't understand then that if there was no significant racism in America, there was no need for the race hustlers. I draw a direct line from that trial to the DEI madness that's ripping this country apart today. And the race hustlers are richer than ever."
The blogger is mistaken. The OJ trial was only 30 years since the Selma March, 20 years since the Black Panthers came to prominence, 15 years since Biden was openly worrying about racial jungles, and (most importantly) only 3 years after Rodney King and the riots. Rodney King set the stage for the racial tensions over OJ .
I will agree that progress had been made and continued to be made up and until 2008. But there were underlying problems happening simultaneously. The destruction of the Black family unit…
Blaming the OJ trial for the rise of DEI is ridiculous, IMO.
I think his overall point was correct, though. Racially, we were better off in the 90s.
-
It was not the main focus of every day life as it is now. Turn on any network TV and it's black this, black that, staffed with black people. How much attention is enough? I'll be the first one to acknowledge their contributions to our society, both good and bad. just as I would any other group. But none of that will ever negate the underlying victim culture being sold.
-
The idea that racial rot started in the 90's is ridiculous, and rather pretends that the root of a lot of the victimhood isn't actually based on the fact that 30 years earlier the victimhood was very real.
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
History doesn't just start at the point when the problems were fixed.
Sure, victimhood is being sold, and is very destructive but it didn't just come out of nowhere.
-
The idea that racial rot started in the 90's is ridiculous, and rather pretends that the root of a lot of the victimhood isn't actually based on the fact that 30 years earlier the victimhood was very real.
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
History doesn't just start at the point when the problems were fixed.
Sure, victimhood is being sold, and is very destructive but it didn't just come out of nowhere.
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
@Aqua-Letifer said in RIP, I guess?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
I think there is a tendency in some quarters to want to just speak about race issues as though they're a recent problem primarily created by liberal white guilt and black criminal culture, as though these occurred in isolation. On the other hand, there's also an inability in other quarters to acknowledge that things have improved and it's not the 1950's any more.
500 years from now, it might be a bit clearer. As LD said, there's only 30 years between Selma and OJ, from a historical perspective it's a blink of an eye.
I was only joking
-
Maybe we could all meet at an agreement not to exaggerate the dangers of everyday racism, such as from white cops against unarmed black people. Maybe that would be an obvious thing we could all agree not to build into wildly exaggerated narratives that seep into the psyches of black kids and poison their perspective on life forever. Maybe we should stop marginalizing people who push back on those narratives, by calling them evil white racists. Maybe those who push back against those narratives are the only ones making any sense, regardless of their skin color.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in RIP, I guess?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
I think there is a tendency in some quarters to want to just speak about race issues as though they're a recent problem primarily created by liberal white guilt and black criminal culture, as though these occurred in isolation. On the other hand, there's also an inability in other quarters to acknowledge that things have improved and it's not the 1950's any more.
500 years from now, it might be a bit clearer. As LD said, there's only 30 years between Selma and OJ, from a historical perspective it's a blink of an eye.
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
@Aqua-Letifer said in RIP, I guess?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
I think there is a tendency in some quarters to want to just speak about race issues as though they're a recent problem primarily created by liberal white guilt and black criminal culture, as though these occurred in isolation. On the other hand, there's also an inability in other quarters to acknowledge that things have improved and it's not the 1950's any more.
500 years from now, it might be a bit clearer. As LD said, there's only 30 years between Selma and OJ, from a historical perspective it's a blink of an eye.
Those things aren't the same.
Some folks are living in a shitty neighborhood that's been shitty for 70 years because of racial practices and beliefs that were mainstream in the 50s and it's nearly impossible for any improvement to happen as the surrounding city continues to cement itself.
That's entirely different from, say, a weaponized HR department that uses equity as cover for elevating social justice sociopaths who target white males not because of racism, but because the sociopaths know that's exactly the group most likely to call them out on their shenanigans.
The most terrible aspect of the second example is that enough of that happens, and people's appetite to fix the first goes way down. But the sociopaths don't care, they're getting theirs.
Please love yourself.
-
Maybe we could all meet at an agreement not to exaggerate the dangers of everyday racism, such as from white cops against unarmed black people. Maybe that would be an obvious thing we could all agree not to build into wildly exaggerated narratives that seep into the psyches of black kids and poison their perspective on life forever. Maybe we should stop marginalizing people who push back on those narratives, by calling them evil white racists. Maybe those who push back against those narratives are the only ones making any sense, regardless of their skin color.
@Horace said in RIP, I guess?:
Maybe we could all meet at an agreement not to exaggerate the dangers of everyday racism, such as from white cops against unarmed black people. Maybe that would be an obvious thing we could all agree not to build into wildly exaggerated narratives that seep into the psyches of black kids and poison their perspective on life forever. Maybe we should stop marginalizing people who push back on those narratives, by calling them evil white racists. Maybe those who push back against those narratives are the only ones making any sense, regardless of their skin color.
Nono, the most important thing is to have more perspective and understanding. If you show that you have enough perspective and understanding, that'll fix things.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
@Aqua-Letifer said in RIP, I guess?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
I think there is a tendency in some quarters to want to just speak about race issues as though they're a recent problem primarily created by liberal white guilt and black criminal culture, as though these occurred in isolation. On the other hand, there's also an inability in other quarters to acknowledge that things have improved and it's not the 1950's any more.
500 years from now, it might be a bit clearer. As LD said, there's only 30 years between Selma and OJ, from a historical perspective it's a blink of an eye.
Those things aren't the same.
Some folks are living in a shitty neighborhood that's been shitty for 70 years because of racial practices and beliefs that were mainstream in the 50s and it's nearly impossible for any improvement to happen as the surrounding city continues to cement itself.
That's entirely different from, say, a weaponized HR department that uses equity as cover for elevating social justice sociopaths who target white males not because of racism, but because the sociopaths know that's exactly the group most likely to call them out on their shenanigans.
The most terrible aspect of the second example is that enough of that happens, and people's appetite to fix the first goes way down. But the sociopaths don't care, they're getting theirs.
@Aqua-Letifer said in RIP, I guess?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
@Aqua-Letifer said in RIP, I guess?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in RIP, I guess?:
This idea that you can just draw a line under 200 years of this stuff and say 'everything is ok now' is foolish.
To what extent are we trying?
I think there is a tendency in some quarters to want to just speak about race issues as though they're a recent problem primarily created by liberal white guilt and black criminal culture, as though these occurred in isolation. On the other hand, there's also an inability in other quarters to acknowledge that things have improved and it's not the 1950's any more.
500 years from now, it might be a bit clearer. As LD said, there's only 30 years between Selma and OJ, from a historical perspective it's a blink of an eye.
Those things aren't the same.
Some folks are living in a shitty neighborhood that's been shitty for 70 years because of racial practices and beliefs that were mainstream in the 50s and it's nearly impossible for any improvement to happen as the surrounding city continues to cement itself.
That's entirely different from, say, a weaponized HR department that uses equity as cover for elevating social justice sociopaths who target white males not because of racism, but because the sociopaths know that's exactly the group most likely to call them out on their shenanigans.
The most terrible aspect of the second example is that enough of that happens, and people's appetite to fix the first goes way down. But the sociopaths don't care, they're getting theirs.
I know it's complex and messed up in a lot of different ways. Also, it's not always sociopaths in HR, it's sometimes genuinely well-meaning people trying to address issues they see as inequities, but messing things up even more.
If there's one thing we all have in common, it's an ability to point the old finger at other groups, and sometimes even our own group.
-
I’ll remind you all that the Bill Clinton Sister Souljah Moment was in 1992…
There was obviously racial unrest in the 90’s. I think we all remember it as being better than it was, but there’s no question that it HAS gotten worse recently. The reasons are up for debate, but it was the stuff in the 90s that shaped Ibram X Kendi, Nikole Hannah-Jones and shaped the educational content and pushed the whole oppressor/victim narrative. Interestingly enough, their work really started becoming mainstream right around when Obama was elected. But you can see a very fast drop in race relations around 2008…
-
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
The Brad
-
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
@LuFins-Dad said in RIP, I guess?:
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
Yeah, I'm actually more sure about the fact the cops were dirty than I am about the details of what happened.
-
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
@LuFins-Dad said in RIP, I guess?:
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
Why are you confident about this?
-
@LuFins-Dad said in RIP, I guess?:
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
Why are you confident about this?
@Horace said in RIP, I guess?:
@LuFins-Dad said in RIP, I guess?:
Now wait a minute, let’s not pretend that the case was a slam dunk… There were a LOT of problems with the investigation and the way Mark Fuhrman conducted it. Like I mentioned earlier, I am still confident it was OJ’s son and his dad just helped him cover it.
Why are you confident about this?
To start with, I was suspicious about the kid’s response. There was something when O.J. got to the house, and then the kid’s reaction. Also, during the trial there were a bunch of things that built the suspicion in my mind. The one damning piece of evidence was always the DNA… 1 in 100,000 match, right? Want to bet that his son would have matched? Then later, other things started coming out.
- The kid had been arrested several times for assault and threatening people with knives.
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/1994/07/27/oj-simpsons-oldest-son-was-arrested-in-92-attack/
There are rumors the kid was diagnosed with Intermittent Rage Disorder and was on Depakote after hearing voices…
-
His alibi was reliant on a hand written time card at the restaurant. The time clock at the restaurant was functional…
-
Remember the knit cap found at the scene with dog fur and human hair that did not match O.J.?
-
Jason owned gloves like the ones that were found at the scene. Want to bet that they would have fit?
- The kid had been arrested several times for assault and threatening people with knives.
-
-
@George-K said in RIP, I guess?:
The footprints?
I wear Beckett Simonen Dress Shoes Want to bet what type Luke wears?
