The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Discussion of science, technology, politics, and other topics that aren't strictly philosophical.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sun Mar 05, 2017 7:31 pm

Considering the spirited discussion following David Quinn's condemning statement about Solway and Trump, it seemed like a good idea to continue part of that discussion in the Worldly Matters forum for those interested. Although one could argue the discussion might touch many philosophical spin-offs, more likely it will be about interpretation of public statements, news articles, social theories and political ideology. Therefore it seems more fitting here. But if any administrator thinks it needs a more central place, feel free to move it.

Perhaps I should explain the term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" which is one I borrowed from elsewhere but is not intended to argue in favor of anything, it just seems to capture the issue very well, no matter if one is against Trump or not. The origin of the term is the following article in the LA Times written by libertarian and antiwar author Justin Raimondo: Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome? -- some excerpts follow:
The country is in the throes of a major epidemic, with no known cure and some pretty scary symptoms. It's called Trump Derangement Syndrome, or TDS, and it’s rapidly spreading from the point of origin – the political class – to the population at large.

In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The president-elect’s every tweet provokes a firestorm, as if 140 characters were all it took to change the world.

The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim’s vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting solely of hyperbole.

As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from reality.

...the final stage of the TDS epidemic: violence against a democratically elected leader. Unless a cure for TDS is found, this is where we are headed.
Although the term "derangement" is here targeting the rather massive and vocal anti-Trump discourse, this term can be used in a different way as well, one which is definitely a central part of the intended discussion. How deranged are Trump and his team actually and how wacky is all the support he's getting from the population, politicians or even military people? Is it irrational to the degree that it should be rejected no matter what? And finally the term might cover as well the chaos in the wake of the Trump election: as if sanity itself took a big hit when discussing US politics and world affairs. The derangement syndrome as bankruptcy of politics itself, demonstrated by illogic and emotion all over the place, becoming indistinguishable from all other, possibly saner reporting on the matter.

The purpose of this thread is to explore the possible rational positions one can take on Trump, the alt-right movement and directly related topics. And as well explore the specific irrationalities involved leading up to surprise elections in the US, as attempt to bring some order into the spreading chaos.

GetoriksII
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 12:20 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by GetoriksII » Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:47 am

Hi,

Some points to consider in all this:

1. "a democratically elected leader"

That's just not true. For a starting point on how democracies actually work, see: Plato's Republic and Machiavelli's Discourses On Livy.

2. "Trump versus liberal establishment / media"

Also untrue. Trump, as well as most alternative media, is their creation. Much of it is now aided by AI personality and belief simulators.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:39 am

GetoriksII wrote: 1. "a democratically elected leader"

That's just not true. For a starting point on how democracies actually work, see: Plato's Republic and Machiavelli's Discourses On Livy.
I think it's more a matter of the legal definition in use by the institution upheld by the presidency. Feel free to change definitions according to your own will or historical discourses but to use such sources to then claim "that is not true" in a whole other context becomes a quite random form of reasoning.

What kind of democracy would you propose then? And what would the the road to eventually get there?
2. "Trump versus liberal establishment / media"

Also untrue. Trump, as well as most alternative media, is their creation. Much of it is now aided by AI personality and belief simulators.
What exactly are these "AI personalities" and "belief simulators"?

GetoriksII
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 12:20 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by GetoriksII » Mon Mar 06, 2017 10:04 pm

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Feel free to change definitions according to your own will or historical discourses but to use such sources to then claim "that is not true" in a whole other context becomes a quite random form of reasoning
Not at all. The idea is to escape from the bondage of formal legal/academic jargon, and instead observe society in a simple, direct, natural manner.
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:What exactly are these "AI personalities" and "belief simulators"?
Here is a nice little introduction to them:
__http://www.hermes-press.com/program1.htm

User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by jupiviv » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:53 pm

"Trump Derangement Syndrome" should be renamed "World Derangement Syndrome". Liberals can't live with the fact that *their* guy isn't in charge of the deranged world. Alt rightists on the other hand are evidently jubilant. So really, what's new?

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Tue Mar 07, 2017 4:27 pm

GetoriksII wrote:The idea is to escape from the bondage of formal legal/academic jargon, and instead observe society in a simple, direct, natural manner.
That's a nice, idealistic, rural vision of life. But when people mass together, those "simple nature" observations will in turn become enshrined in fixed jargon, so that nobody runs off and creates chaos with their own interpretations and variations. In other words, so far human nature was the reason you can't have simple things. So what you propose to escape is the bondage of what was human nature when it comes to rules or organizing themselves. A truly philosophical aim! But still no grounds for your claim that it was not true that Trump was democratically elected, unless no modern president ever was. Feel free to argue that the current derangement is some kind of unavoidable consequence of a mistaken over-formalized legal jargon. The idea sounds interesting. But you need to do way better than just claiming it is so or posting links.
What exactly are these "AI personalities" and "belief simulators"?
Here is a nice little introduction to them:
__http://www.hermes-press.com/program1.htm
Interesting but not really the topic here. Attempts to predict, influence or control others are obviously main drivers within human society, economics and often more subtly in all human relationships. Denial of these core power struggles might be a problem for the modern self which tells itself a whole other, more romantic story and then continues to sacrifice itself for that.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Tue Mar 07, 2017 4:33 pm

jupiviv wrote:Liberals can't live with the fact that *their* guy isn't in charge of the deranged world. Alt rightists on the other hand are evidently jubilant. So really, what's new?
That's a bit simplicstic. There's for example now a massive response even from people who are generally not that concerned about who's in charge. If it's just about "our' guy not being in charge, why suddenly not wanting to live with it after this election? So yes, it's something new. And Donald Trump, as politician, does not fit in any category of president material which we've seen so far.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Tue Mar 07, 2017 4:45 pm

Glen Greenwald is one of the few independent journalists of note who understands the derangement and keeps chasing it down

Democrats Now Demonize the Same Russia Policies that Obama Long Championed -- The Intercept 2017-03-06
One of the most bizarre aspects of the all-consuming Russia frenzy is the Democrats’ fixation on changes to the RNC platform concerning U.S. arming of Ukraine.

This attempt to equate Trump’s opposition to arming Ukraine with some sort of treasonous allegiance to Putin masks a rather critical fact: namely, that the refusal to arm Ukraine with lethal weapons was one of Barack Obama’s most steadfastly held policies
.

Overall, Obama himself was aiming for détente with Russia as main foreign policy, just check out his administration's work with Russia on Iran or START. The thing is Obama had to do most of it under the radar as he could not afford to alienate an already Cold War minded congress. And he had to deal with his government of compromise: with the hawk wing of his own party (Clinton) which ruled State Department and the Republican wing lead by McCain. Trump just took this direction and placed it in view. While he's clearly no fan of the Iran deal (to please the Republicans?), it was a deal mostly facilitated and desired as well by Russia.

User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by jupiviv » Tue Mar 07, 2017 7:09 pm

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
jupiviv wrote:Liberals can't live with the fact that *their* guy isn't in charge of the deranged world. Alt rightists on the other hand are evidently jubilant. So really, what's new?
That's a bit simplicstic. There's for example now a massive response even from people who are generally not that concerned about who's in charge. If it's just about "our' guy not being in charge, why suddenly not wanting to live with it after this election? So yes, it's something new. And Donald Trump, as politician, does not fit in any category of president material which we've seen so far.
He's very much like any other post-WW2 US president. He has a personal *style* that sticks out and drives a lot of people nuts. The difference is in the novelty of background, i.e., a crude parvenu rather than a well-groomed statesman hailing from an old, noble and prosperous house. Actually, Reagan preceded him in that as well.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:21 am

jupiviv wrote:He's very much like any other post-WW2 US president. He has a personal *style* that sticks out and drives a lot of people nuts. The difference is in the novelty of background, i.e., a crude parvenu rather than a well-groomed statesman hailing from an old, noble and prosperous house. Actually, Reagan preceded him in that as well.
Indeed Trump appears quite similar in temperament to a few 19th century predecessors. Perhaps not really a coincidence?

There's more happening than "novelty of background" or style though, especially for a post-WW2 president in terms of defensive and isolationists posturing, campaigning on a darker view of the current state of America and hinting at a return to protectionism. It's as different as it's unattainable. But then again, as for promising the unlikely and impossible to his voters, that would be "very much like" the last bunch indeed.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:35 am

Just to continue with well argued evidence on the insanity when it comes to the accusations of a Russia-Trump connection. Here's a piece written by a well known Putin and Trump critic, who is also a Jewish lesbian and Russian dissident. While she's anti-Trump in many ways, even more than I'd support, she's clearly worried about what's happening within the discourse.

Russia: The Conspiracy Trap by Masha Gessen.

Various quotes which at least scratch the surface - a bit! In my view there's way more to be done with these observations.
"For more than six months now, Russia has served as a crutch for the American imagination."

"Given that the story has been driven by the intelligence community and the media, it is perhaps unsurprising that each subsequent revelation creates the sense of pieces falling into place. It builds like an old-fashioned television series, dispensed in weekly episodes with no binge-watching allowed. What remains from the earliest installments is not so much information as mood"

"If Russian disruption efforts were more successful during the 2016 American election, it was not because the Russians have become so much better at what they do or have finally developed a sophisticated understanding of American politics—it is because American politics have come to resemble the TV caricatures."

"Russiagate is ... promoting a xenophobic conspiracy theory in the cause of removing a xenophobic conspiracy theorist from office."

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Dan Rowden » Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:58 am

The Russia connection issue is all about dollars, not politics or ideology - at least where Trump is concerned, because with him, it's always about money. Following the money trail and Trump connection of one Dmitry Rybolovlev is a very interesting way to spend half an hour or so.

In a not-so-Russian sense, which does involve politics and ideology, as well as Steve Bannon, antiquating oneself with Robert Mercer (the money behind Bannon) is also a useful way to spend a few moments.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... gel-farage

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Mon Mar 13, 2017 4:45 pm

More sane people are calling out another hysterical symptom of the broader Trump Derangement Syndrome.

US diplomats warn of Russia hysteria
Former U.S. ambassadors to Russia and Foreign Service diplomats are angered by what they view as a “witch-hunt” pursuing Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, warning that “hysteria” over Russia in Congress and the media will undermine U.S. interests abroad.
As for Dan's conspiracy theory, beyond one billionaire/socialite buying expensive property from another billionaire/socialite, there seems little to it. No trace of an actual meeting, no trace of some FSB or Putin connection. Rich Russians buying American stuff for what was not exactly a bargain. Wow!

It's hard to understand what point is made by bringing up conservative donor Robert Mercer. Not even effort is made to explain the significance. Lazy thinking Dan! You don't even bother making a point any more. You throw some mysterious names together and we need to derive some magic from that.

As for the Guardian article, it's just as bad. The whole case is just describing modern big data analytics, of which Google is the pack leader. So many business and organizations are doing this. The guardian repackages it and makes it into something dark but limits itself to one player only. Thereby perhaps proving to some degree Mercer's ideology: "story after story is bad".

Dan, please raise your standards.

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Dan Rowden » Mon Mar 13, 2017 8:01 pm

If you want me to spoon feed you you're going to starve. As I've said, you are not paying sufficient attention to be taken seriously by me in this discussion. It's not simply about Trump laundering money for a Russian oligarch, it's also why his private jet was following Trump around the campaign trail for seemingly no reason that his Brietbart author spokesman didn't want to explain.

This isn't conspiracy. I have offered no conspiracy theory. These are simply facts that you can do whatever the hell you want with - such as ignore.

And on the issue of instituting a Fascist Kleptocracy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmJJtpZSt2o

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:04 am

Dan Rowden wrote:why his private jet was following Trump around the campaign trail for seemingly no reason
and
This isn't conspiracy. I have offered no conspiracy theory. These are simply facts that you can do whatever the hell you want with - such as ignore.
Interesting: "simple" facts meaning whatever the hell you want is a form of conspiratorial thinking, Dan. This one is just a bit more institutionalized and easier to embrace for some. Do you have any idea what the exact chance is that two times in that period Trump would have landed in the time frame of any "suspicious" business man? No, neither do I. Funny how that works.

The two men both have very recognizable planes, so the "secret" meetings were standing out a bit to the many spotters. Hard to believe they needed each other that much and take those risks. A more rational approach for the conspiracy theory to make more sense would be to provide also a motive to meet, some outline of a plot. Besides just Rybolovlev having bought expensive property which he might end up selling with a profit margin. He seems to have replaced the house with three separate properties which seem to sell well -- who knows perhaps he just had to park his money there for his divorce to blow over.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:34 am


Rationality alert: Putin Derangement Syndrome Arrives, by Matt Taibbi, in Rolling Stone Magazine
  • Whatever the truth about Trump and Russia, the speculation surrounding it has become a dangerous case of mass hysteria

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Wed Apr 05, 2017 6:58 am

In the bizarro Trump news department: Top Obama Adviser Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel -- Eli Lake at Bloomberg.

Now it might be not exactly as Michael Doran suggested that "somebody blew a hole in the wall between national security secrets and partisan politics" or exactly as Trump tweeted about Obama having his "wires tapped" in Trump Tower. But it might be getting uncomfortable close to both accounts. Take notice, this can all go down the drain pretty fast. What's the use of all the good old NSA blanket interception of all traffic if you can't use it once in a while, right?

As for a funny, bit raw, heavy liberal leaning review on Trump's election check out this video from Jonathan Pie (over 3 million views and counting). Under all the over-the-top whine and curses he makes actually rather good points like "Trump represents a change". Indeed it's overall a supercharged version of Solway addressing Quinn's challenge especially on the SJW elements.

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Dan Rowden » Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:17 pm

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Rationality alert: Putin Derangement Syndrome Arrives, by Matt Taibbi, in Rolling Stone Magazine
  • Whatever the truth about Trump and Russia, the speculation surrounding it has become a dangerous case of mass hysteria
Mass interest and speculation does not equal mass 'hysteria'. A Congressional committee, a Senate committee and an FBI investigation along with the Nunes' antics and an ex Security Adviser asking for immunity does not equal mass 'hysteria'. What it does mean, at this stage, is pretty much anyone's guess

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:54 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:Mass interest and speculation does not equal mass 'hysteria'. A Congressional committee, a Senate committee and an FBI investigation along with the Nunes' antics and an ex Security Adviser asking for immunity does not equal mass 'hysteria'. What it does mean, at this stage, is pretty much anyone's guess
Actually, you're completely wrong. Mass hysteria would be exactly what it is, in the case all these committees, the FBI investigation and the majority of the media would be flogging a horse not only dead but not existing. It would not be the first time in modern history by the way. You should not just dismiss something just because large groups of uninteresting and possibly irrational people are dismissing it. Which is how it looks like to me with your reasoning so far.

But yeah so Matt Taibbi guesses it's mass hysteria. And you're just saying it's not. You were not adding one thing with your comment because Taibbi actually made a case on why he thinks it's hysteria. You didn't address one point he made! For example you ignore the completely ludicrous presentation of Louise Mensch which goes largely uncontested and for which the NYT allowed a world size stage. It smells like hysteria to me: emotional, irrational games which you are starting to get caught up in. But we'll see when you stop guessing and start seeing the irrational base underneath the developments, not limited to Trump.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:50 pm

Nice example of extremely erratic "mainstream" reporting on this topic from the NYT in Trump, Citing No Evidence, Suggests Susan Rice Committed Crime. It's a good example to dissect it as to learn why the claim of "95%" mainstream reporting would be "false" or "corrupted" is not entirely without substance. If this one simple report would already be corrupt, what else would be?

- "may have committed a crime by seeking to learn the identities of Trump associates swept up in surveillance of foreign officials by United States spy agencies"

No, the claim is that they used Obama's laws on the unlimited surveillance of communication between foreigners and Americans to single out political opponents with radical different views on international policy after branding that as "danger". In other words the article gives you a rather colored interpretation framed as fact, like the title as framing of the whole news article.

- "Mr. Trump gave no evidence to support his claim"

Like most published NYT stories on Russian infiltration and manipulation of the Trump team have not been sustained with public evidence... so this cannot be a double standard here now, right? The article later discusses the evidence so it's contradicting itself, like a mental crime done in brought daylight. People will lap it up of course as they don't think , don't reason. The NYT is dealing in emotional gluing together of factoids into narratives. Like most media, left and right, but the NYT pretends to be something way different and thus needs to be held under even more scrutiny.

-"how Mr. Trump seizes on claims made by the conservative news media, from fringe outlets to Fox News"

Yes, put 50% of the disagreeing news sources (even more in terms of market size) in a range of "from fringe to Fox". Nice trick! Like Hillary putting openly half of Trump supporters into a basket of deplorables: racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic. Same trick which is crucial in understanding why she lost and gets seen, like the NYT, as corrupted in all of her thought.

- "On Sunday, a conservative writer and conspiracy theorist reported, without identifying his sources, that Ms. Rice had been the one to seek identities of the Trump associates."

While he broke the story, nothing he wrote hasn't been verified and confirmed by now. Silly to even bring it up. More framing.

- "The broader issue of how intelligence collected by the national security apparatus is disseminated and used has long been an animating issue for civil libertarians, a point that Mr. Trump made in the interview."

The point is that the Obama White House disseminated many conversations between Team Trump and Russians in their eagerness to "prove" some national security issue but in the end seems quite partisan and out-of-context gossipy. And since the national security angle is falling more apart by the day as a by-product of feverish imagination, what remains is partisan spying on the competition, using the power of the NSA, completely trashing all the constitutional protections with that.

No wonder everyone is in denial!

- "Representative Devin Nunes ... rushed to the White House to brief the president, even though it was later revealed that the information had come from White House officials."

So since it's known they were NSC members, what happened to "citing no evidence" when the top member of the House Intelligence Committee is shown information by the top of the National Security Counsel, listing all the transcripts of intercepted conversations involving the Trump team? The question of course is how to interpret this all. But all NYT does here is framing, zero research, nothing! It's not a newspaper, it's really toilet paper to wipe off the shame from a corrupted "established" ass.

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Dan Rowden » Fri Apr 07, 2017 8:19 pm

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Actually, you're completely wrong.
Well, that surely goes without saying. But while we're posting articles by Matt Taibbi:

Trump the Destroyer: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/fe ... er-w473144

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Dan Rowden » Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:27 pm

Bernie Sanders talking about Koch Bros and other stuff:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx9wKYOOZSc&t=19s

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sat Apr 08, 2017 2:31 am

Dan Rowden wrote: But while we're posting articles by Matt Taibbi:

Trump the Destroyer: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/fe ... er-w473144
I like this part
  • He is already making idiots and accomplices of us all, bringing out the worst in each of us, making us dumber just by watching.
Of course everyone always thinks it's about the other. That's why I posted this topic trying to explore the idea of a contagious syndrome and not the sanity of a Trump administration. And I'm not even excluding my own part in this. But what I think Trump (as topic as well as president) does is to bring to the surface contradictions and faults already present but partly hidden. Extremely divisive (and as such not wise) but interesting in a time where so much has been falsely conflated .

User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by jupiviv » Sat Apr 08, 2017 2:50 pm

Thus Spake Jupiter:

I'm going on record - his legacy will be one of irrelevance, and may God smite me down if it turns out otherwise. Of course, it really depends what you mean by "irrelevance". Trump is absolutely correct about immigration, jobs being outsourced and some other things. But who isn't! These problems were identified by intelligent people years ago. The reason they were not fixed is because, as Trump says, the US government and other western governments are corrupt. But that isn't the only reason - at this point, they *can't* be fixed. Actually, they could never have been fixed, because the people who created them (hint - not Trump) worshiped science and technology without understanding the first thing about them.

Will Trump drain the swamp? He hasn't, judging by his cabinet picks. Will he rein in the FED? No. Will he reduce debt? He'll probably break Obongo's record of increasing it. Will he rejuvenate the economy? No. Will he implement a fascist state? It already existed, and has since people decided to let experts tend to their affairs and corporate marketing and PR do their thinking for them.


Jupiter Also Spake Thus:

Trump is as carefully manufactured as any other politician. He is a heel. In other words, a good baddie. Good baddies are charismatic, intelligent and efficient. They get the job done without pondering about ethics and popularity (the Wall, trade wars, travel ban[?]). They are contrasted with bad baddies (rapefugees, Clintons, SJWs) and bad goodies (establishment politics in general, MSM[?], deep state, cuckservatives and disillusioned liberals who have seen the light).

The bad baddies are usually fewer in number and yet potentially very threatening; their flaws are inhuman and irredeemable and thus their demise is enjoyable. The bad goodies have more human flaws - stubborn, partial, misguided, incompetent etc. They can be sympathised with and are redeemable. The good goodies are even scarcer than the bad baddies and yet boldly await A New Hope (copyright Disney-Lucasfilm). To keep things real they require some faint flaws to adorn their natural goodness.

Returning to the good baddie/s - he always has a humane side (Trump loves his family, is somewhat avuncular even when confronting bitter enemies). He also tends to support both goodie and baddie ideas which the others consider to be incompatible with each other for various reasons (welfare but not for illegal immigrants, protectionism but low taxes). Within this resolution of *needless* delusions lies the good baddie's heart and his worldly ideal, and also the only traces of honesty in the narrative. Too much dishonesty here would ruin immersion. Anyways, the bad baddies and recalcitrant bad goodies are eventually destroyed and the remaining turn into good goodies or baddies.

All this to keep things realistic. Also, I have summarised Game of Thrones and other "brilliant" web/cable TV shows.

In marketing and showbiz, as in law, lying and illusions are literally bread and butter. Many people know this, and expect their money's worth. However, lawyers in my opinion occupy a higher moral plane because they at least lie for the benefit of their clients.


Both prophesies are being played out in real time right now. Basically, I am the Second Coming. See y'all at My apotheosis.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6044
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: The Trump Derangement Syndrome: rational or irrational?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:04 pm

jupiviv wrote:Both prophesies are being played out in real time right now. Basically, I am the Second Coming.
You're coming all right. They're not really prophesies though, are they? Way too generic but it does tie in with this post which referred to the observation "American politics have come to resemble the TV caricatures".

The following Daily Beast analysis (despite all the ultra-bias) confirms the Derangement Syndrome, now also known as "mental TV plot cancer". The horrid truth that Trump, and ultimately most of Washington DC -- like any imperial power center, didn't have any real vision, plan or principle to begin with and needs all the bluster to cover up that repressed truth.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... dubya.html
  • "The power centers are shifting". Ironically, those centers appear to be shifting into the hands of the last people Trump’s angry Republican base expected to empower: neoconservative, war hawk Republicans on Capitol Hill and a couple of young, rich, politically inexperienced New York Democrats who also happen to be family.

Post Reply