Derangement Syndrome: Alive, if Not Exactly Well

By M.sarari @Adobe Stock

A New Level of Hatred/Abuse

Today in America, “The politics in our Country” are engulfed in “a whole new level of Hatred, Abuse, and Distrust.” It’s hard to disagree with that. More important, as Daniel Henninger asks in the WSJ, “How did we get here?” 

In the early years of America’s founding, “the vitriol and personal attacks among our revered Founding Fathers was startling in its intensity.” Perhaps, as Mr. Henninger thinks, we could consider as “progress that no one has suggested Messrs. Trump and Biden settle their differences like Hamilton and Burr, in a duel at 10 paces.”

Agree or not, the beginning of the current state of U.S. politics headed toward the ditch during the Republican presidential primary debates in 2015, when Mr. Trump turned the personal insult into a low art form.

(Just) ask Carly Fiorina.

But that can’t fully explain what happened after Mr. Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016. Democrats may not like the term Trump Derangement Syndrome, but how else to explain the political atmosphere they consciously assembled from then until, well, right now?

The unstoppable Trump attacks included the Russian collusion narrative, Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation and two impeachments between 2019 and 2021.

Dictator on Day 1?

Donald Trump was not even in office when along came:

• Indictments by prosecutors in Georgia and New York City
• the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid
• The Merrick Garland/Jack Smith indictments
• The Biden “threat-to-democracy” mantra
• Kamala Harris using the Sept. 10 debate’s two hours to provoke Mr. Trump with personal attacks—“dangerous,” “a disgrace,” “unfit,” and “understand what it would mean if Donald Trump were back in the White House with no guardrails.” And of course, “dictator on day one.” 

A Real Threat to Democracy

Details are numerous on the “abhorrent events” of Jan. 6, and, as noted, the role of Mr. Trump’s own rhetoric.

But did Democrats think this nonstop assault on a person who twice got about half of the country’s popular presidential vote would be cost-free, that it would have no negative effect on the psychological health of America’s public life? Did “assassination” ever enter their minds?

Coming to the rescue, perhaps a little late, is the “conventional wisdom:” We need to tone it down. 

It may not be possible to draw a line from Ryan Routh or Thomas Crooks to anything Mr. Biden or Ms. Harris said. Both were disturbed psychologically. As was the man who attacked Paul Pelosi with a hammer, and the Austrian man who was plotting mass killings at the Taylor Swift concert in Vienna last month. As were all the young men on the too-long list of school shooters in the U.S.

Overdosing on Pharmaceuticals

It would be easy to dismiss each of them as “nut case outliers” Henninger, however, asks that you consider the pharmaceutical:

Many “normal” people can’t fall asleep anymore without first consuming a heavy, pleasurable dose of online abuse and distrust. This is the blame narcotic, and too much of it can be injurious to one’s mental health.

In less than 50 days (really), voters will discover whether the targeting of Mr. Trump helps or hurts his candidacy. Will undecided voters agree with Trump that he deserves re-election because his treatment by the Democrats has put him in danger. Or will they decide that he’s just too hot for another presidential term.