President Biden gives an unscheduled speech ⏤ remember the phrase ‘stochastic terrorism.’

Stochastic Terrorism is a new phrase that refers to talking about a person or group in a way that increases the statistical likelihood of that person or group becoming the target of violence. In other words, anything anyone says about any individual or group that could be considered critical in any way ⏤ can be called ‘stochastic terrorism.’

If we were to criminalize ‘stochastic terrorism,’ every single one of us, regardless of political affiliation, would be guilty, as we have all said things that are critical of others, and being critical of a person or group, of course, increases the statistical likelihood of that person or group being targeted for violence by someone who may hear that criticism.

A rational person might draw a line and say that some criticism is light enough as not to increase the likelihood of violence by a large enough amount to justify calling it ‘stochastic terrorism,’ but then any such line is invariably going to be subjective, such that as with ‘hate speech,’ any attempt to regulate or subvert ‘stochastic terrorism’ will be easy to turn into a political weapon to shut down the opposition.

Has the political left said anything about, say, Donald Trump that might increase the likelihood of him becoming a target of violence? President Trump, at one point, had to be whisked away to the Presidential bunker based on the level of rioting just outside the White House gate, so I am going to venture that people on the political left have said a great many things that would qualify as ‘stochastic terrorism.’

I am also going to venture that Joe Biden will focus solely on ‘stochastic terrorism’ as supposedly perpetuated by the political right, when he gives his speech tonight.

Be very careful to listen for calls to suppress ‘stochastic terrorism,’ as those will be calls to suppress Joe Biden’s political opponents, and note that the President is doing this less than a week before the midterm elections.

Also, listen for any discussion about ‘making sure every vote is counted.’

I prefer the phrase ‘making sure every voter is counted,’ as it suggests that every voter will only be allowed to vote once, whereas ‘making every vote count’ infers that fraudulent or illegal votes should be counted too.

Note that the position of the Democratic Party is, indeed, that fraudulent and/or illegal votes SHOULD be counted. Their position is that such fraud is so unlikely to occur that we do not need to take any action at all to prevent fraud – and that any action we might take that COULD prevent fraud could also make it more difficult for people to vote and must thus be rejected.

The Democrat position is not just that everyone should be ABLE to vote, should they desire to do so, but that everyone SHOULD vote even if they have no idea what is happening in the world and no genuine desire to cast a vote. In other words, having convenient polling locations someone can vote in or request an absentee ballot from is insufficient. We need to physically put a ballot in every single person’s hand, and if they do not want to fill them out, we should fill them out for them.

I think Democrats believe ⏤ and I honestly think they believe this ⏤ that if everyone voted then Democrats would almost always win. Democrats might concede that there are some locations so hick that Republicans might win even if everyone voted, but I think Democrats have a very low view of Republicans and generally view Republican voters as either too corrupt or too stupid to consider. Most Democrats honestly believe they could run the country better without us.

I do not think the country would be better off if only Republicans voted.

Well, let me throw an important caveat there. I do think the country would be vastly better off if only Republicans voted in this election, and that will probably be true in 2024 as well, but that is because the Democratic leadership is using the fear of our democracy being crushed by MAGA extremists as a precursor for undermining our democracy, such that they can implement their OWN extremism.

And THAT is because the Democratic Party is currently run by power-hungry extremists.

As a general rule, I believe only having one political party is a recipe for oppression, as having only one voice at the table means that one group can do whatever it wants with no counterbalance. A Republican Party by itself would take the country in an oppressive direction in a desire to conserve traditional American values.

And that is not to say there is anything wrong with traditional American values, because there isn’t, but values need to be able to change over time to stay relevant to an ever-changing society.

I look at Poland. Poland is 97% Catholic, and when 97% of the people in a country all have the same religion and the same cultural norms, that will absolutely manifest itself in law – as it should.

We were 97% (or more) Christian when our nation was founded. We had different denominations of Christianity, but we did not genuinely have different religions, or if we did, they were so rare as to have no effect. Our laws, values, and traditions reflected the fact that we were all Christians.

Imagine the kind of society we would have had we only allowed one party, and that party had put holding onto our Christian laws, values, and traditions its primary purpose. Imagine how different our country would look today, and imagine how oppressive it would feel to the 30% who are not Christian, and to the 70% who are not strict enough in their religious observances to want to live under Quaker rules.

Our society has evolved only because we allow other views; for the most part, that evolution has been positive.

A society can, however, also change too quickly, or too much, or in the wrong direction, and this is precisely the threat we face from the Democratic Party today ⏤ the party leadership wants to change our society too much, too quickly, and generally speaking in the wrong direction.

Not everything Democrats want is wrong. I agree with the Democrats on a number of important social issues. But right now, overall, the Democratic Party is entirely off base, and it needs to be stopped. After a couple of good, sound election losses, perhaps the adults within that party will take charge again, and the Democrats can once again be the party that forces us to evolve.

At the end of the day, we need both parties. We need Democrats to force us to evolve and adapt, and we need Republicans to force us to preserve what is still relevant from our traditions, values, and culture, as we evolve. The parties counterbalance one another to provide balance.

And currently, the Democrats have gone too far.

We all have the right to live our lives as we wish, provided we allow others to do the same. That is a good thing, and it is something we absolutely need to preserve.

But you will not hear Joe Biden say anything tonight about preserving liberty. Instead, you will hear a divisive speech that attacks and demonizes Republicans for the supposed offense of doing the same to Democrats. Joe Biden is going to offer us a trade ⏤ we give him our freedom, and he will give us security.

At the end of the day, absolute security is impossible, and if we give up our freedom to try and get more security, we will have neither freedom nor security. All we will have is a tyrannical state.

So when Joe Biden offers his Faustian bargain tonight, make sure you reject it.

And vote accordingly.