Stochastic Terrorism: Who’s Really Inciting Violence?
By Jim Reynolds | www.reynolds.com
Author’s Note
This essay was inspired by Christopher F. Rufo’s recent piece “The Left-Wing Terror Memeplex.” His framing of how today’s Left uses decentralized narratives and cultural amplification to seed political violence prompted me to explore the same subject through my own lens. While Rufo maps the structure, what follows digs into the vocabulary and incantations that fuel the cycle.
Most Americans have heard the term “stochastic terrorism” floating around on cable news or social media. It sounds like jargon, but it’s simple to understand. It means this:
If powerful people repeat hostile rhetoric often enough, sooner or later some unstable individual will take it literally and lash out.
Think of it like weather forecasting. You can’t predict which lightning bolt will hit, but you know the odds go up in a thunderstorm. When political and media figures pound the same violent metaphor day after day, the statistical chance rises that a few unhinged “weak vessels” will take up the gauntlet.
That’s the nuts and bolts.
The question is: who’s actually doing it?
The Left’s Incantations
For years, the loudest voices on the Left have leaned on a short, toxic vocabulary. Over and over, without evidence, they’ve branded Trump and his supporters with words that carry historic associations with mass violence and dictatorship.
• “Trump is Hitler.”
• “Trump and his followers are fascists.”
• “Trump is a racist, as are his followers.”
• “Trump is a white supremacist.”
• “Trump will never leave the White House.”
• “Trump is a dictator.”
• They even branded January 6th an “insurrection” — despite no guns, no dead cops, no organized plan, and mysterious fit young men appearing at just the right time to pull barriers and ram doors with bike racks.
Bob: “If your neighbor’s Hitler, every option’s on the table. That’s the problem.”
This is not policy critique — it’s existential framing. Once you convince people they’re living under a Nazi, the leap from words to violence is short.
The Right’s Vocabulary
Now let’s compare. What do conservatives typically say about their opponents? The list looks very different.
“Socialist.” Economic critique.
“Communist / commie.” Sometimes playful, sometimes literal when admitted.
“Big government.” A governance critique, not a threat.
“Tax and spend.” Descriptive, rooted in policy.
“DEI-inspired.” Cultural critique, occasionally touching race, but not genocidal imagery.
“Soft on crime.” Crime policy critique.
“Supports open borders.” Immigration policy critique.
“She looks drunk.” Said by comedians and may be true. Nobody is inspired to shoot a harmless, mindless drunk.
These terms may sting, but they don’t summon visions of Hitler, lynch mobs, or dictatorship. They are policy-coded labels. Some are mocking, some are blunt, but none of them prime unstable listeners to reach for violence.
Bob: “You can’t exactly storm the barricades over a budget deficit.”
The Double Standard
So here’s the contrast in black and white:
Left: existential slurs — Hitler, fascist, racist, white supremacist, dictator. Always one-directional. Never evidenced. Proven false in practice.
Right: policy critiques — socialist, tax-and-spend, open borders. Sharp, but tethered to debate over governance.
The Left accuses the Right of “stochastic terrorism” every time conservatives question policy. But the actual incitement language — the words most likely to convince a weak mind that violence is justified — is used almost exclusively by the Left.
And they know exactly what they’re doing. This isn’t ignorance. It’s projection.
The Receipts
It starts with verbal incitement, repeated endlessly.
It travels through prestige media to social platforms, acquiring a mass audience.
Statistically, a few unstable, easily manipulated individuals will take it literally.
And then it shows up in headlines as another “lone wolf” attack, with no mention of the rhetorical storm that seeded it.
That is stochastic terrorism by the book. And only one side has normalized it.
Bob: “If you sow storms, don’t look surprised when lightning strikes where you aimed it.”
The Hard Truth
If this framework means anything, then the facts are clear:
Conservatives argue policy.
The Left incites hatred.
Only one side repeats words that conjure Hitler, fascism, racism, and dictatorship.
Only one side is actively raising the odds that some unhinged follower will pick up a weapon in the name of “justice.”
That side is the American Left. And no matter how loudly the media insists otherwise, the receipts tell the story.
America loves free speech more than any country in the world. But how do we stop this murderous and predictable cycle from starting in the first place?
The Echo and the Storm
Words repeated, loud and fast,
turn from forecast into blast.
Say “dictator” every night,
and someone thinks the call’s to fight.
Truth needs proof, not just a name,
but slander loves a simpler game.
One side argues, one side shouts—
and hopes a weak mind carries out.
The storm was seeded, not by chance,
but by the endless echo dance.