45 pointsby garbawarb8 hours ago5 comments
  • diamond5595 hours ago
    People are being shot in the face by masked gangs of brown shirts, while they are on the ground after trying to administer aid, we're beyond "stochastic" terrorism at this point.
  • iamnothere4 hours ago
    This concept is sophistry when deployed against Democrats just as much as it was when deployed against Republicans.

    “Stochastic terrorism” is free speech.

    I get it, you don’t like your enemies and you want to find a way to punish them. Maybe even to prevent them from saying things that seem to be increasing their base of support. So you find a few dangerous whackos who also happened to articulate the same points that you’re trying to suppress. Boom, instant justification to suppress that speech! Even if the speech isn’t per se illegal, maybe the fact that both your target and the whackos said the same thing makes it ok to suppress that speech anyway!

    No, that doesn’t make it ok. Free speech is free speech. Stop trying to unconstitutionally suppress the rights of your opponents.

    • PorterBHall3 hours ago
      In the United States, stochastic terrorism is neither a statutory offense nor a term of art in criminal codes; it is an analytic label used in scholarship and practitioner writing to describe probabilistic risks of violence linked to rhetoric. Recent legal and critical surveys stress that usage is heterogeneous and contested, and that the concept's value lies in describing a structure of communication and harm rather than in supplying a justiciable element test.[7] By contrast, U.S. incitement law is anchored in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), which protects advocacy short of speech that is intended to produce imminent lawless action and likely to do so. Stochastic accounts often concern non-directive, cumulative rhetoric whose effects materialize unpredictably, making the Brandenburg imminence and likelihood prongs difficult to satisfy absent clear exhortation.[2]
      • timmmmmmay3 hours ago
        the more you don't want somebody to be allowed to say something, the more stochastic it is
  • ares6237 hours ago
    Sometimes it's good to put a name on a nebulous "thing" that we know permeates us.
  • 7 hours ago
    undefined
  • phendrenad26 hours ago
    Here's a far more comprehensive breakdown of the current state of discourse and varying definitions of the term: https://grokipedia.com/page/Stochastic_terrorism_political_c...
    • phendrenad25 hours ago
      Downvotes really should be public, it would make HN a much more civil place.