AOC’s Shallow “Stochastic Terrorism” Claim

If this was a legitimate concept, AOC's own violations would be front and center

Good afternoon my friend, it’s been a few months since we spoke, as I’m not on social media much these days and I don’t have a good system for staying in touch with friends who live several states away.

The last time we spoke in November, I remember activist Ben Collins was in the news pushing the idea of “Stochastic terrorism” which is the idea that people with large platforms can demonize someone or a group, and if the criticism is heated enough and the audience large enough, some maniac may emerge and commit violence against the target.

This is something I’ve pondered for years and it’s certainly worthy of a nuanced discussion, but unfortunately, we don’t see that happen. Instead, we see superficial claims like Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortaz gave last week during a CNN interview, claiming criticism from prominent Republicans lead to death threats directed at her and she now has to live with constant security protection.

Like every other person that uses the term “stochastic terrorism” against their opponents, AOC only sees it as something done to her, never by her. A few months ago blogger Dr. Rollgator wrote a great piece about how Stochastic Terrorism proponents (that is to say, people who push the concept, not culprits of the act) are one-eyed watchdogs who only use the term for their opponents, and ignore cases where their own allies are guilty.

You want an example? Sure, spree killer Micah Xavier Johnson murdered five police officers in Dallas and was inspired by anti-police rhetoric popularized by groups like Black Lives Matter. I don’t support the argument that BLM is responsible for those murders, and that is precisely because I reject the concept of stochastic terrorism.

AOC, on the other hand, has been promoting it for months and it’s a derelict of duty that no reporter has asked her if she feels responsible for Willem van Spronsen's 2019 failed terrorist attack on an immigration detention center.

In 2019 AOC repeatedly compared immigration detention centers to Nazi concentration camps, both before and after the July 13 attack. Van Spronsen used the same phrase in his manifesto before he tried to blow up a large propane tank and burn the detention center where immigrants were being held after illegally crossing the border. He fired a rifle at Tacoma Police and died in the firefight. His manifesto and letters to friends made it clear he expected to die in this attack on what he saw as a fascist state.

BLM grifter Sean King called van Spronsen a “martyr” the same way a jihadist would refer to a suicide bomber, then later deleted the Tweet. AOC, on the other hand, made no public comment on the attack, continued to compare ICE detention centers to Nazi concentration camps, and as far as I can see was never once questioned about it.

Now would be a great time for the press to question here about how her own hyperbole may or may not have inspired a lone gunman to make a terrorist attack. I don’t expect to see it happen, of course, but it certainly should.

The reason I don’t accept this concept that critics are responsible for goons who want to murder the target is that some people really do deserve to be criticized and I shouldn’t have to refrain in case someone else decides to do something I never suggested. If I had a larger public platform and I wanted to criticize a union official who stole from the pension fund, I should be able to. This is fundamental. I shouldn’t have to wonder if some 60-year-old teamster is going to go Travis Bickle on the corrupt official.

By the same token, even though I think AOC was wrong to compare ICE detention centers to Nazi concentration camps, she needs to have the right to do so and if her statements inspired van Spronsen, the guilty part is van Spronsen.

It’s bad enough for her to suggest her critics are responsible for how others respond to their statements but it’s much worse when she personally may have inspired an actual terrorist attack and she continues to display zero self-awareness of the contradiction.