American derangement syndrome permeates society
March 5 (UPI) -- The term Trump Derangement Syndrome applies to those who have a pathological fixation with Trump and find all of his behavior to be unacceptable, illegal and/or immoral. But let's be fair. There was a Biden Derangement Syndrome, too. And frankly, that can be extended to those who adore or hate another individual or issue.
The forensic conclusion is that too many Americans have become infected with a virus far worse than COVID-19. It is the derangement syndrome. And it has caused friends, families and even strangers to become enemies at worst and often part ways. Why?
I have argued elsewhere that the decline in American culture and politics began in August 1964 when, with only two dissenting votes in the Senate, Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, a de facto declaration of war thrusting the country into the Vietnam Quagmire. At that stage, about three-fourths of Americans trusted government and most institutions.
Today, for many reasons, both government and non-governmental organizations have lost the trust and confidence of the public to the point where about three-fourths of us have no faith in these institutions. One major cause has been the failure of these entities to tell the truth. Another has been a string of failures to govern in which success was promised and we failed or lost. As a Vietnam vet, that was case one.
Afghanistan and Iraq also contributed to this string of disasters. Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons that did not exist had to be destroyed. And Afghanistan would be fully democratized. Worse, since 1964, the government has failed to govern.
Watergate, the Vietnam withdrawal and the subsequent failure of governments to provide for the needs of the public metastasized in the last election over the price of goods and eggs; the border and transsexual issues regarding boys playing girls' sports.
The last balanced budget passed by Congress was 30 years ago. That meant the government had to deal with continuing resolutions that probably caused a 10% annual cut in purchasing power due to the the inefficiencies imposed. Without a budget, no constraints are applied. For 2025, the federal budget is about $7 trillion, with revenues about $5 trillion. Why?
Combine this refusal to accept fact and truth and how derangement affects Ukraine. President Donald Trump is convinced he can impose a peace on Ukraine. Despite truth and fact about Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump is dead wrong. Zelensky is not a dictator.
The Ukrainian Parliament approved martial law. Europe is providing Ukraine more funding than the United States. And Ukraine did not start the war. Why does Trump continue to reject reality as he denies the results of the 2020 election?
The staged reputational assassination of Ukraine's president defies explanation. Despite 43 minutes of a 49-minute press conference that went civilly, why did Vice President V. D. Vance launch such an unprecedented and unprovoked, out-of-the-blue. ad hominem attack on Zelensky? What was the offensive comment Zelensky made? In the prior 43 minutes, there was none. And then Trump piled on. This shift tone was cosmic in scale.
Allies were stunned. The conclusion that somehow Trump was overly sensitive to Russian interests, was unavoidable. Yet, instead of demanding identifying what was so offensive, the Democratic strategy was to attack. That gets us nowhere. And Trump then doubles down on his assertion, falsehood or whatever is the line he is pushing.
The other side is often no different. A number of otherwise "normal" people believe Ukraine struck first. Despite the overwhelming evidence of Russia's perfidy, a piece of fake news was offered to contradict truth and fact. There was no flexibility in these fixed views. And this derangement applies to virtually every politically divisive issue.
As, or if, the United States is viewed as increasingly unreliable under Trump's America First by allies, will this affect the proliferation of nuclear weapons? According to former U.S. ambassador to Japan Rahm Emmanuel, South Korea was barely dissuaded from going nuclear. But what about Japan? Or Germany, with a neo-Nazi party the second largest?
And could the Saudis pay a fortune to Pakistan to shortcut the route to gaining nuclear weapons? Meanwhile, what are Iran's mullahs thinking about finally obtaining a nuclear weapon? This could be the most serious threat to preventing nuclear proliferation.
To resolve who fired the first shot, just watch the whole press conference. But who is inflicted with the derangement syndrome is prepared to do this? That is the source of this crisis.
Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with General The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out late next year, is Insanity: The Arc of Failure: Can Decisive Strategic Thinking Transform a Dangerous World? The writer can be reached on Twitter @harlankullman.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
4 minutes ago
- UPI
In letter, more than 300 scientists rebuke Trump research cuts, NIH director
June 9 (UPI) -- Hundreds of scientists via the National Institute of Health signed a published letter in protest to NIH leadership and recent cuts by the Trump administration. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political moment over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," more than 300 scientists wrote Monday to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in a so-called "Bethesda Declaration" published by Stand Up For Science in rebuke to Trump administration research funding cuts and staff layoffs. They added in the letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress overseeing NIH that they "dissent" to Trump's policies that "undermine" the NIH mission, "waste" public resources and harm "the health of Americans and people across the globe." In the open letter, they said the current endeavor to "Make America Healthy Again" referred to "some undefined time in the past." "Keeping NIH at the forefront of biomedical research requires our stalwart commitment to continuous improvement," the letter's writers said, adding that the life-and-death nature of NIH work "demands that changes be thoughtful and vetted." According to the letter, the Trump administration terminated at least 2,100 NIH research grants since January, totaling around $9.5 billion and contracts representing some $2.6 billion in new research. "We urge you as NIH Director to restore grants delayed or terminated for political reasons so that life-saving science can continue," the letter added in part. "This undercuts long-standing NIH policies designed to maximize return on investment by working with grantees to address concerns and complete studies," it said. It further accused the White House of creating a "culture of fear and suppression" among NIH researchers. Bhattacharya, a Stanford University professor and health researcher, called the agency the "crown jewel of American biomedical sciences" and said he had the "utmost respect" for its scientists and mission during his confirmation hearing in March. On Tuesday, Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify before the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Trump's 2026 NIH budget proposal which seeks to cut roughly 40% of NIH's $48 billion budget. "This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research," the scientists penned to Bhattacharya. The letter goes on to characterize it as "dissent" from Trump administration policy, quoting Bhattacharya during his confirmation as saying "dissent is the very essence of science." "Standing up in this way is a risk, but I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," says Jenna Norton, a program officer at the NIH's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. "If we don't speak up, we allow continued harm to research participants and public health in America and across the globe," Norton said in a statement, adding that if others don't speak up, "we allow our government to curtail free speech, a fundamental American value."
Axios
4 minutes ago
- Axios
Scoop: Cotton urges GOP senators to double down on fiery LA protests
Senate Republican leadership is urging senators to double down on condemning the chaotic protests that erupted over the weekend in Los Angeles, Axios has learned. Why it matters: Republicans are convinced they have a winning issue. " This gives us an opportunity to remind Americans how extreme the Democratic party is on immigration," Sen. Tom Cotton's office wrote to communications staff on Monday. "Americans have a choice between Republicans' law & order vs. the Democrats' car-burning, illegal alien rioters," the email, obtained by Axios, continues. Republicans see a political opening: "So far, every Senate Democrat who has spoken out has backed the rioters..." Zoom in: Republicans want to specifically target California Governor Gavin Newsom. The Cotton staffer encouraged Senate offices to paint Newsom as "the lead enabler of these riots." "What kind of governor blames police officers and the National Guard for 'inciting' this violence," Cotton wrote on X. Newsom is viewed as a likely formidable 2028 presidential candidate. Republicans also see it as an opportunity to remind voters that a key part of their sweeping "one, big beautiful bill" involves providing significant resources to ICE. The conversation around the bill has largely been focused on tax and spending cuts. Zoom out: President Trump deployed the National Guard over the weekend to help tamp down on the escalating protests — in spite of Newson's opposition. Trump has also threatened to arrest Newsom.
Associated Press
4 minutes ago
- Associated Press
How unusual is it for the National Guard to come to LA? Here's what to know about the city's history
President Donald Trump's deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles in response to immigration protests is the latest in a long history of U.S. elected officials sending troops in hopes of thwarting unrest connected to civil rights protests. National Guard troops are typically deployed for a variety of emergencies and natural disasters with the permission of governors in responding states, but Trump, a Republican, sent about 1,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles despite the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats. Confrontations began Friday when dozens of protesters gathered outside a federal detention center demanding the release of more than 40 people arrested by federal immigration authorities across Los Angeles, as part of Trump's mass deportation campaign. Trump said that federalizing the troops on Saturday was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California. Newsom said Trump's recent decision was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Some of the previous National Guard deployments have preserved peace amid violent crackdowns from local law enforcement or threats from vigilantes, but sometimes they have intensified tensions among people who were protesting for civil rights or racial equality. On rare occasion, presidents have invoked an 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act, which is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. Other times they relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances, which is what Trump did on Saturday. Here is a look at some of the most notable deployments: George Floyd protests in Los Angeles in 2020 Almost five years ago, Newsom deployed approximately 8,000 National Guard troops to quell protests over racial injustice inspired by the death of George Floyd in Minnesota. Well over half of the troops deployed in California were sent to Los Angeles County, where police arrested more than 3,000 people. City officials at the time, including then-Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, supported Newsom's decision. Rodney King protests in 1992 Some have compared Trump's decision on Saturday to George H.W. Bush's use of the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992, after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. In just six days the protests became one of the deadliest race riots in American history, with 63 people dying, nine of whom were killed by police. Syreeta Danley, a teacher from South Central Los Angeles, said she vividly remembers as a teen seeing black smoke from her porch during the 1992 uprisings. Danley said that at the time it seemed like law enforcement cared more about property damage affecting wealthier neighborhoods than the misconduct that precipitated the unrest. She said some people in her neighborhood were still more afraid of the police than the National Guard because once the troops left, local police 'had the green light to continue brutalizing people.' The National Guard can enforce curfews like they did in 1992, but that won't stop people from showing up to protest, Danley said. 'I have lived long enough to know that people will push back, and I'm here for it,' Danley said. Watts protests in 1965 There were deadly protests in the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles in 1965 in response to pent-up anger over an abusive police force and lack of resources for the community. Over 30 people were killed — two-thirds of whom were shot by police or National Guard troops. Many say the neighborhood has never fully recovered from fires that leveled hundreds of buildings. Integration protests in the 1950-1960s In 1956, the governor of Tennessee called the state's troops to help enforce integration in Clinton, Tennessee, after white supremacists violently resisted federal orders to desegregate. President Dwight Eisenhower called the Arkansas National Guard and the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army in 1957 to escort nine Black students as they integrated a previously white-only school. A few years later, the Maryland National Guard remained in the small town of Cambridge for two years after Maryland's Democratic Gov. J Millard Tawes in 1963 called in troops to mediate violent clashes between white mobs and Black protesters demanding desegregation. Selma, Alabama, voting rights protest in 1965 National Guard troops played a pivotal role in the march often credited with pressuring the passage of Voting Rights Act of 1965, when nonviolent protesters — including the late congressman John Lewis — calling for the right to vote were brutally assaulted by Alabama State Troopers in Selma, Alabama, in 1965. Two weeks later, then-President Lyndon B. Johnson sent National Guard troops to escort thousands of protesters along the 50-mile (81-kilometer) march to the state Capitol. Johnson's decision was at odds with then-Gov. George Wallace who staunchly supported segregation. ___ Riddle is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
