site banner

The Bailey Podcast E035: Ray Epps Does Jay Six

Listen on iTunesStitcherSpotifyPocket CastsPodcast Addict, and RSS.


In this episode, we talk about the deep state, J6, and Ray Epps.

Participants: Yassine, Shakesneer.

Links:

Jack Posobiec's Pipe Bomb Allegation (Twitter)

Pipe Bombs in Washington DC (FBI)

Meet Ray Epps: The Fed-Protected Provocateur Who Appears to Have Led the Very First 1/6 Attack on the US Capitol (Revolver)

Social Media Influencer Charged with Election Interference Stemming from Voter Disinformation Campaign (DOJ)

'I started a riot for the sitting president': Why Ali Alexander won't go to jail for his role in Jan. 6 (Raw Story)

J6 Select Committee Interview of Ray Epps

Ray Epps Defense Sentencing Memo (Courtlistener)

Proud Boys Sentencing Memos (Courtlistener)

Wishing For Entrapment (Yassine Meskhout)


Recorded 2024-01-19 | Uploaded 2024-01-22

8
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

While I don’t see any evidence of govt. efforts making J6 worse, I do concede the idea that just a few individuals can whip up a crowd. I think crowd dynamics are somewhat conformity based- At a given protest every member of the crowd has a particular proclivity to jump a police barrier, for example. As soon as one or two people with little restraint do that, it makes it much more acceptable

I've been thinking about these dynamics lately, though not in the specific context of crowds. More in the context of social norms.

There is a team of engineers who work on a product and they're all genuinely invested in bettering the project. Then one engineer (or manager) joins and everyone can kind of tell his priority is his career. He oversells and self-credits a bit too much. Then he gets promoted and somebody else decides he's going to start prioritizing his own career over the project. And now there is a cascade.

One can imagine a similar dynamic in academic honesty, charity for one's outgroup, cheating on taxes, not paying for the subway, bribes, etc.

The million dollar question is: in what situations is the state stable, and in what situations is there a cascade?

Consider f(x) -> y, where x is the percent of people currently defecting and y is the percent of people who would see nothing wrong with defecting if at least x% of other people were defecting.

Here the answer is immediately clear: when f(x) > x the group will tend towards defecting and when f(x) < x the group will tend towards cooperating.

This model leads us to the conclusion that the groups whose norms are the most affected by a small group of defectors are groups where f(x) is roughly equal to x. In fact, when f(x)=x exactly, an arbitrarily small shift can cause the group to cascade to either extreme!

Groups where f(x) is typically far from x will automatically tend to one of the extremes and will tend to be more stable (for better or for worse).