Trump Derangement Syndrome seems to be real

[Kishkumen]

Can’t have TDS without talking about the original, Bush Derangement Syndrome. It was a way to label people who seemed to irrationally think that George W. Bush and his administration would do something crazy like make up a lie about Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction and so we needed to invade Iraq. I think I agreed at the time that there were folks irrational in how Bush made them think or feel. I still do think there were people, but maybe far too many people were unable to raise legitimate questions.

Yeah, I guess I must have been one of those people with BDS, since I did not believe Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that he would imminently use against us, thus threatening our security. I also thought the evidence presented to back up this claim was both dubious and flimsy, certainly not the kind of thing one would put scores of thousands of lives in harms way for. But I guess I was just "deranged" by my personal dislike of Bush (even though I voted for him in 2000) to think so.

Oh well!

[Res Ipsa]

Of course extreme viewpoints and reactions are a thing. And that extreme rhetoric provokes more extreme rhetoric in an insane feedback loop is also a thing.

But I would suggest that responding to extreme statements by labeling a person as "deranged" is itself an escalation.

Kudos to both Jack Black and the agent for condemning the extreme comment without escalating conflict.

Agreed as to their handling of the issue. What about the label for the problem? Something other than degangement? Is there even a problem at all?

The first part in fixing a problem is admitting there is a problem in the first place. While many Trump fans use this "TDS" meme as a weapon to mischaracterize every Trump critic, I think it's important to acknowledge a pattern when it appears. Glass wasn't the first to fall victim, and he won't be the last. Have there been enough of these incidents to establish something unique to Trump?

I can't imagine many Americans 20 years ago lamenting a failed assassination of Bush, even though a large part of the country disliked him politically.

The "derangement syndrome" label originated, I believe, during the Bush Administration. "Bush Derangement Syndrome" It was used to disparage critics of GWB. When Obama was elected, it morphed into "Obama Derangement Syndrome." It was used to disparage critics of Obama. Next up was use of "Trump Derangement Syndrome." I haven't noticed "Biden Derangement Syndrome," but it could easily apply to any number of claims about Biden.

The first problem with the label is that it has been used and will be used to dismiss peoples concerns, worries, alarm, etc. about the President without having to address the issue that is causing the reaction. Presidents can do things that should be expected to cause concern, worries or alarm. If the response to words that express concern, alarm or worry is "TDS," the label functions as a thought-stopping cliché.

The second problem is that "derangement syndrome" is a pejorative. If you've ever had a positive interaction follow from responding to someone's concern or worry with "you're crazy," please tell me the recipe for your secret sauce. Responding to someone's expression of anxiety by attacking their sanity falls under the category of gaslighting.

The third problem is related to the first. Inventing a noun label as placeholder for what is in reality a wide range of reactions caused by different things in different circumstances changes the topic of the conversation from "Is what the President is doing or saying cause for concern or alarm," to "is the label being correctly applied." A made up label is treated as real, becoming the focus of the discussion in place of what is actually real -- what the President did or said and whether a reaction is reasonable never get discussed.

Echoing a question you asked, I don't think that making up a noun-label in this circumstance is necessary or even helpful. We have a plethora of perfectly good adjective labels that can be applied to a statement. Extreme, inflammatory, dehumanizing, etc. They put the focus on the specific language being used as opposed to attacking the person.

[Res Ipsa]

Can’t have TDS without talking about the original, Bush Derangement Syndrome. It was a way to label people who seemed to irrationally think that George W. Bush and his administration would do something crazy like make up a lie about Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction and so we needed to invade Iraq. I think I agreed at the time that there were folks irrational in how Bush made them think or feel. I still do think there were people, but maybe far too many people were unable to raise legitimate questions.

Yeah, I guess I must have been one of those people with BDS, since I did not believe Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that he would imminently use against us, thus threatening our security. I also thought the evidence presented to back up this claim was both dubious and flimsy, certainly not the kind of thing one would put scores of thousands of lives in harms way for. But I guess I was just "deranged" by my personal dislike of Bush (even though I voted for him in 2000) to think so.

Oh well!

Based on my recollection, I doubt the label would have been applied to what you just expressed. I think it was used more commonly with claims that GWB ordered 9-11 or attacked Iran as revenge for a plot to kill his father, or was acting as part of a conspiracy built around the Project for a New American Century. I don't think that it had become the catch all dismissive phrase that TDS has become.

[drumdude]

Yeah, I guess I must have been one of those people with BDS, since I did not believe Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that he would imminently use against us, thus threatening our security. I also thought the evidence presented to back up this claim was both dubious and flimsy, certainly not the kind of thing one would put scores of thousands of lives in harms way for. But I guess I was just "deranged" by my personal dislike of Bush (even though I voted for him in 2000) to think so.

Oh well!

Based on my recollection, I doubt the label would have been applied to what you just expressed. I think it was used more commonly with claims that GWB ordered 9-11 or attacked Iran as revenge for a plot to kill his father, or was acting as part of a conspiracy built around the Project for a New American Century. I don't think that it had become the catch all dismissive phrase that TDS has become.

I definitely missed the BDS term, and I was very familiar with the 9/11 conspiracy movement.

I of course remember a lot of vitriol towards Obama. But only the most openly racist and backwards public figures were calling for his head. I have been absolutely shocked at the number of leftist public figures openly lamenting the failed assassination.

It seems like the ultimate irony, being so worried about Trump destroying democracy that you would openly call for political violence which undermines democracy like nothing else.

[Res Ipsa]

Based on my recollection, I doubt the label would have been applied to what you just expressed. I think it was used more commonly with claims that GWB ordered 9-11 or attacked Iran as revenge for a plot to kill his father, or was acting as part of a conspiracy built around the Project for a New American Century. I don't think that it had become the catch all dismissive phrase that TDS has become.

I definitely missed the BDS term, and I was very familiar with the 9/11 conspiracy movement.

I of course remember a lot of vitriol towards Obama. But only the most openly racist and backwards public figures were calling for his head. I have been absolutely shocked at the number of leftist public figures openly lamenting the failed assassination.

It seems like the ultimate irony, being so worried about Trump destroying democracy that you would openly call for political violence which undermines democracy like nothing else.

I don't think "ultimate irony" has been reached yet. The most extreme voices in our political discourse have been advocating destroying the village in order to save it for quite a while now.

[Kishkumen]

I haven't noticed "Biden Derangement Syndrome," but it could easily apply to any number of claims about Biden.

Hair-sniffing?

[Kishkumen]

The third problem is related to the first. Inventing a noun label as placeholder for what is in reality a wide range of reactions caused by different things in different circumstances changes the topic of the conversation from "Is what the President is doing or saying cause for concern or alarm," to "is the label being correctly applied." A made up label is treated as real, becoming the focus of the discussion in place of what is actually real -- what the President did or said and whether a reaction is reasonable never get discussed.

BOOM!!!

[Kishkumen]

Based on my recollection, I doubt the label would have been applied to what you just expressed. I think it was used more commonly with claims that GWB ordered 9-11 or attacked Iran as revenge for a plot to kill his father, or was acting as part of a conspiracy built around the Project for a New American Century. I don't think that it had become the catch all dismissive phrase that TDS has become.

Ah, cool. Maybe this is why I never felt targeted by the term and had forgotten its existence entirely.

[drumdude]

I definitely missed the BDS term, and I was very familiar with the 9/11 conspiracy movement.

I of course remember a lot of vitriol towards Obama. But only the most openly racist and backwards public figures were calling for his head. I have been absolutely shocked at the number of leftist public figures openly lamenting the failed assassination.

It seems like the ultimate irony, being so worried about Trump destroying democracy that you would openly call for political violence which undermines democracy like nothing else.

I don't think "ultimate irony" has been reached yet. The most extreme voices in our political discourse have been advocating destroying the village in order to save it for quite a while now.

It’s not the extremists I’m worried about. As I said in my opening, Jack Black was taken back at what his friend said. Presumably because he was not an extremist.

[Res Ipsa]

I haven't noticed "Biden Derangement Syndrome," but it could easily apply to any number of claims about Biden.

Hair-sniffing?

Applying the term in the same way that TDS has been used, yes. But I don't think the label is productive.

What may be productive is discussing how ordinary folks like Shades get punked into labeling Biden as a creepy hair sniffer though a combination of confirmation bias and a few malicious actors. Once you see the trick, it's hard to unsee it.