What do you Americans make of this Trump derangement syndrome (TDS)?

[bassman]

Politics. Never ends well. Politics, man. They creep me out.

[Moon Knight]

Politics, man. They creep me out. Perfect. Haha.

[EvilNed]

Politics. Never ends well. I don't know, I think healthy discussion is needed. I wouldn't want to be a person who is so determined in my beliefs that I outright dismiss any and all arguments that disagree with mine. That kind of thinking is dangerous. It means I think I'm better than almost everyone else. That's obviously not the case.

[Neil]

To cast aside all emotion for the sake of logic and facts... well it kills what makes us human, IMO. Are you yourself not virtue signalling for calling out virtue signalling in others? I have considered the facts (unlike Trump and his kind, who ignore the truth and make up their own reality to justify heinous acts), and I have also decided to allow myself to emotionally respond to something that honestly should affect everyone's emotions to at least some level. Do you feel nothing if I bring up the term "holocaust"? I don't think the world is simple, but I know that without a sense of right and wrong, we will only be worse off. Do you disagree? It's a worrying trend that you seem to think that people can't be bad on an individual level, for some reason. Is that really how you feel? Should we stop calling anything and/or everything 'bad' or 'good', Neil? Let's approach it from another angle? If terms such as "concentration camp" are used to criticise/describe border detention centres, then what term should then be used to honestly and realistically describe the likes of Auschwitz? If terms such as "fascist" or "Nazi Scum" are used for Trump (or Trump supports) then what term should then be used to honestly and realistically describe the likes of Hitler? Making decision based on "emotion," risks not considering facts properly... Using emotive "loaded" rhetoric risks making unfair accusations... ie: "concentration camp" and "fascist" are being lazily used to leverage emotion and not facts. - - - Updated - - - Politics. Never ends well. Just like most Stephen King books!

[EvilNed]

Well, technically, Auschwitz was an extermination camp... So we do actually have a word for that.

[shootemindehead]

Politics, man. They creep me out. Somebody get that man a pint. - - - Updated - - - Well, technically, Auschwitz was an extermination camp... So we do actually have a word for that. [pedant]Actually, Auschwitz was built as a normal konzentrationslager and it's official designation was never changed.[/pedant] - - - Updated - - - If terms such as "concentration camp" are used to criticise/describe border detention centres, then what term should then be used to honestly and realistically describe the likes of Auschwitz? The term "concentration camp" is a British one and was first used during the Boer war. There are many different types of "concentration camp". It doesn't have to mean the likes of Auschwitz.

[JDP]

The term "concentration camp" is a British one and was first used during the Boer war. There are many different types of "concentration camp". It doesn't have to mean the likes of Auschwitz. Indeed. If we use "official" dictionary definitions, a concentration camp is "a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard". The definition, therefore, is very flexible and accommodates many types of such camps, not just the "Nazi-style" ones, which is what the majority of people nowadays assume when they hear the term "concentration camp". In fact, the United States itself also had "concentration camps" during WW2. Thousands of Italian, German and Japanese Americans were put in such places during the war (their only "crime" being their ethnic/national origin), though they are labelled as "internment camps" so that people don't associate them with the much dreaded and little understood "concentration camp" label. But the fact is that they too fall under the general definition of "concentration camp".

[Neil]

Indeed. If we use "official" dictionary definitions, a concentration camp is "a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard". The definition, therefore, is very flexible and accommodates many types of such camps, not just the "Nazi-style" ones, which is what the majority of people nowadays assume when they hear the term "concentration camp". In fact, the United States itself also had "concentration camps" during WW2. Thousands of Italian, German and Japanese Americans were put in such places during the war (their only "crime" being their ethnic/national origin), though they are labelled as "internment camps" so that people don't associate them with the much dreaded and little understood "concentration camp" label. But the fact is that they too fall under the general definition of "concentration camp". Dictionary aside, when the left use the term concentration camp for a Border Detention Centre, I think we all know the "emotion" we're supposed to infer from it, and the image it's supposed to conjure up They're going for quite the literal comparison...

[shootemindehead]

Dictionary aside, when the left use the term concentration camp for a Border Detention Centre, I think we all know the "emotion" we're supposed to infer from it, and the image it's supposed to conjure up They're going for quite the literal comparison... The right are just as guilty of using emotive terms when they want to. FFS, Ann Widdecombe was banging on about slavery in a rant about the EU a little while ago. Someone who gets paid handsomely by the EU, a club Britain willingly joined, using "slavery" in a silly speech about Brexit.

[Neil]

The right are just as guilty of using emotive terms when they want to. FFS, Ann Widdecombe was banging on about slavery in a rant about the EU a little while ago. Someone who gets paid handsomely by the EU, a club Britain willingly joined, using "slavery" in a silly speech about Brexit. Yeh... Agreed OTT BUT it was a great speech wasn't it Heart felt and to the point, even if somewhat clunky in its analogies Farage's face was classic! He was pi$$ing himself! ps: We didn't exactly agree to join what it is now

[EvilNed]

The right are just as guilty of using emotive terms when they want to. FFS, Ann Widdecombe was banging on about slavery in a rant about the EU a little while ago. Someone who gets paid handsomely by the EU, a club Britain willingly joined, using "slavery" in a silly speech about Brexit. I'll agree there. Ben Shapiro uses the word "communist" when talking about Bill de Blasio - and honestly seems to believe that the term is fitting.

[shootemindehead]

Yeh... Agreed OTT BUT it was a great speech wasn't it No Neil. It was embarrassing. I'm all for Brexiteers stating their cases for leaving, but bullshit like Widdecombe's gibberish is unneeded, to say the least. - - - Updated - - - I'll agree there. Ben Shapiro uses the word "communist" when talking about Bill de Blasio - and honestly seems to believe that the term is fitting. I couldn't care less what Ben Shapiro says about anything at all, to be honest. He's a clickbait fraudster of the lowest kind.

[blind2d]

I don't even understand what there is to hold against Trump. You seem to have a very difficult time defining what a fascist manner is, as you keep shying away from the question. But should you wish to define it, I'm all ears. But until then I can't take the argument seriously. ...Then you haven't been paying attention. I am not shying away. I'm referring you to the dictionary. Which is the authority on definitions of words, if I'm right about that. Now, if what you're asking for is my personal definition, then I would call a fascist thusly: anyone who is a provable bigot, who believes in the rule of violent oppression above all else, who believes they are more right than anyone else, who doesn't care who gets hurt as long as they get their way. Sound like Trump yet? Oh, you also have to be a nationalist; something Trump is proud to call himself. Again, you don't seem to be paying attention. - - - Updated - - - Let's approach it from another angle? If terms such as "concentration camp" are used to criticise/describe border detention centres, then what term should then be used to honestly and realistically describe the likes of Auschwitz? If terms such as "fascist" or "Nazi Scum" are used for Trump (or Trump supports) then what term should then be used to honestly and realistically describe the likes of Hitler? Making decision based on "emotion," risks not considering facts properly... Using emotive "loaded" rhetoric risks making unfair accusations... ie: "concentration camp" and "fascist" are being lazily used to leverage emotion and not facts. I guess I'm not understanding your questions, Neil. We call a bigot a bigot. We call a violent nationalist (nazi) a nazi. Often the two overlap. Again, to throw emotion out the window entirely... Is unrealistic to say the very least. Now, what facts do you know about Trump, Neil? That he is a bigot, and a nationalist, yes? Or am I wrong about that evaluation of the man? Is it a fact Neil that there are people, including children, that the US government is holding as captives in overcrowded detention centers? ...Is this entirely dissimilar from the concentration camps of nazi Germany? True, they're not being systematically executed (yet), but it's worryingly close. Unless worrying about other people is just too emotional for Neil, Captain of Facts and No Emotions. :/

[ProfessorChaos]

i really really really hate to jump back into this, but i've heard enough bullshit from blind that i can't help myself. i don't claim to be nor do i want to be a flag humping far-right idiot, but to me the democrats have gone so far off course to what really matters to this country... my views are probably enough for you to break out your giant generalizing paintbrush and label me as a nazi/bigot/racist/homophobe/xenophobe/cis-gender piece of white trash (or whatever term you like to demonize those who don't follow your worldviews), and if that's the case then go fuck yourself but here it goes: how do you know for a fact that trump has a copy of mein kampf on his nightstand as you claim? again, i'm no fan of the man, so i'm not defending him, but what you wrote sounds like total hysterical bullshit to me....and now on to my main beef, concerning patriotism and the like: what the fuck is wrong with being a nationalist? since you're so concerned with dictionary definitions (except when you are more concerned with feelings rather than facts, that is) i'm seeing it as someone who has pride in their country and thinks that their country should be able to determine what is best for itself, and not be subject to ruling by some outside entities. and how is what our current president is doing any more violent in that regard than any of his predecessors? i really think that your holier-than-thou democrats are in great danger of losing the next round of elections because of how far to the left they are going. i really don't think that the majority of america is interested in opening the borders and providing free healthcare for anybody who wants to come here, giving people money to stay at home and do nothing, or erasing our fucking hard-fought history just because some people may be offended by what it took to get to where we are today. our history in this country is far from flawless, but what country can claim that they are a perfect utopia with an impeccable record? we've still got a lot of work to do, but you can't honestly say that the majority of the citizens here have it worse now that trump is in office. if the exact same shit was going on and the only difference was that hillary clinton was the commander-in-chief, i really doubt there'd be nearly as much pissing and moaning and doomsday-alarming going on at all. sorry for the rant, and please don't get your panties in a bunch, it's just that i think you are very delusional in many ways and are living in an imaginary world that really doesn't exist. there probably never will be a utopia, and the left seems hell-bent on completely destroying our country and culture with all of their lofty aspirations to achieve it that are probably never going to come true. do you seriously believe that if the ridiculous green new deal bullshit was to come to fruition that the rest of the world would just fall in line as well and we could save the planet from the climate apocalypse they are predicting in 12 years? and there are tons of people right here who are legit citizens who need help....why the hell should we just take in every person in the world and take care of all their needs? have you ever heard of the lifeboat analogy? there's only room for so many...and i do agree there is an offensive amount of income inequality and disparity going on, but there are plenty of people who we should be helping before we go and try to save the entire fucking world. edit: i really don't want to go tit-for-tat and go on about all this shit till the next round of elections, but i've got a pretty strong sense of pride and served my country in the armed forces and honestly believe that it's a great place with an inherently flawed, but still redeemable story...and i can only sit by for so long while people constantly bitch and bad-mouth it and what's happening with it these days. sincere apologies to anyone i've offended or angered. different strokes for different folks, i suppose.

[EvilNed]

...Then you haven't been paying attention. I am not shying away. I'm referring you to the dictionary. Which is the authority on definitions of words, if I'm right about that. Now, if what you're asking for is my personal definition, then I would call a fascist thusly: anyone who is a provable bigot, who believes in the rule of violent oppression above all else, who believes they are more right than anyone else, who doesn't care who gets hurt as long as they get their way. Sound like Trump yet? Oh, you also have to be a nationalist; something Trump is proud to call himself. Again, you don't seem to be paying attention. You're going to have to be a lot more specific in here because it appears as if all you're doing is dodging questions. First off, you seem to be shifting the goal post here and including everything you disagree with Trump on to allow you to hold him to a higher standard than any other US president in history when it comes to "winning the election" - which is just unfair and I can't take that seriously. Second, I have read the dictionary definition of a fascist - which you refer to but never quote. So here it is: a person who believes in or sympathizes with fascism. (often initial capital letter) a member of a fascist movement or party. a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views. So here we go, he's obviously not a sympathizer of fascism. He's not a member of any fascist movement. He's not dictatorial. So that leaves "A person with extreme right-wing views". That's a very broad concept - but even if we go by the assumed GAL TAN (that is; speaking only of social issues) scale here Trump isn't very far to the right. If he's an extreme right-wing, then what do we call the nazis? I'd wish for you to come from a place of open mind here and try to be open to the decades of political debate that's preceeded this. Fascist has become a buzzword for closeminded left wing liberal arts students in the latest years. A derogative term applied to anything to the right of the political center. Just like when Ben Shapiro calls Bill de Blasio a communist, I can't take anyone seriously who calls Trump a fascist. - - - Updated - - - I couldn't care less what Ben Shapiro says about anything at all, to be honest. He's a clickbait fraudster of the lowest kind. To be clear: He's an idiot.