28-08-2018, 11:23 PM
If we could nail down the concept we have been discussing, then IMHO we could solve the whole Trump problem including Trump Derangement Syndrome. Who better to help solve it than someone whose uncle coined the term "genocide"?!?
The Trump Derangement Syndrome has driven a large number of people to attempt to write their own dictionaries. They have re-defined "truth", they have re-defined "propaganda" and apparently they have also modified the definition of "fascism".
Not that terms don't need modification from time to time. A little over 100 years ago, the Mormon Church was started. I have had a discussion with a Doctor of Divinity as to whether the Mormon Church is Christian. He said definitely not. But maybe they are!
So the definition of Christianity had to be modified to either include or exclude Mormons. This exercise may have modified the concept of Christianity one way or the other. I'm not sure about that.
So maybe along comes Donald Trump and now we have to expand or modify the 100 year old concept of fascism. Or maybe not.
The thing that concerns me, though, is that you have people openly advocating the use of "shorthand" words to describe groups of people. Historically, people using "shorthand" words to describe people or individuals just doesn't have a good record.
Hitler used the word "Aryan" to describe people although they were not really Aryans. Hitler also invented his own definition of who was a "German" and who was a "Jew." Hitler redifined Jehovah's Witnesses as "Bible students". Etc. Etc.
We don't need to say much about Joseph McCarthy who used "shorthand" to describe people he didn't like.
I'm trying to think of an example where using "shorthand" labels to describe people was actually beneficial or helpful. I can't think of any off the top of my head. There may be some such examples. I don't know.
Superficially, it would seem that people are looking through the dictionary trying to find a negative expletive or category to put on Trump. I'm not sure they are finding it. So if they can't find a negative shorthand expletive that accurately describes Trump, then one could possibly conclude that he doesn't deserve to be so labeled.
I guess you could have something very bad invented in the world that didn't yet have a name. It would still be bad, but you'd have to come up with a name. I'm just not sure that mis-applying an older, historical word is the answer, though. The danger with that is that if the shoe does not fit, then those using the shorthand word will lose authority and lose credibility.
When Trump claims that he is the victim of a Witch Hunt, then changing the definition of Witch may not help things with respect to Trump.
I have to ask, if Trump is evil (and many people think he is), then why isn't there an accurate word out of history to describe him (and/or his movement)?
Personally, I am dead serious when I suggest that Trump is virtually a clone of the Roman Emperor Nero. But then, I can defend that statement. It doesn't require any "shorthand" or re-writing of the dictionary. It is simply a fact that Nero came up with a new way to govern Rome, breaking with his predecessors and appealing directly to the crowd, the mob, the "little people" and gave them goodies that they previously never had been promised. Nero had a very powerful, personal brand that he carefully maintained.
IMHO, Trump fits the mold of Nero but he doesn't fit the mold of Hitler, Franco or Mussolini. I'm not sure about Caligula or Tiberius, etc. etc.
To summarize, it would seem like the opponents of Trump should make accurate criticisms and accurately portray his faults and weaknesses. If he is called "Hitler", then when he doesn't start concentration camps, etc. his opponents will lose their credibility. It's possibly a case of crying "wolf, wolf".
If Trump is so bad, then there should already be words in the English language which can do the job of describing the "evil" which he represents. Re-writing the dictionary just opens up too many problems in my opinion.
But then, fascism was always a general and imprecise label to start with. Many people hid behind it. Maybe it's the best label available. This whole controversy is sort of mind boggling IMHO.
James Lateer
The Trump Derangement Syndrome has driven a large number of people to attempt to write their own dictionaries. They have re-defined "truth", they have re-defined "propaganda" and apparently they have also modified the definition of "fascism".
Not that terms don't need modification from time to time. A little over 100 years ago, the Mormon Church was started. I have had a discussion with a Doctor of Divinity as to whether the Mormon Church is Christian. He said definitely not. But maybe they are!
So the definition of Christianity had to be modified to either include or exclude Mormons. This exercise may have modified the concept of Christianity one way or the other. I'm not sure about that.
So maybe along comes Donald Trump and now we have to expand or modify the 100 year old concept of fascism. Or maybe not.
The thing that concerns me, though, is that you have people openly advocating the use of "shorthand" words to describe groups of people. Historically, people using "shorthand" words to describe people or individuals just doesn't have a good record.
Hitler used the word "Aryan" to describe people although they were not really Aryans. Hitler also invented his own definition of who was a "German" and who was a "Jew." Hitler redifined Jehovah's Witnesses as "Bible students". Etc. Etc.
We don't need to say much about Joseph McCarthy who used "shorthand" to describe people he didn't like.
I'm trying to think of an example where using "shorthand" labels to describe people was actually beneficial or helpful. I can't think of any off the top of my head. There may be some such examples. I don't know.
Superficially, it would seem that people are looking through the dictionary trying to find a negative expletive or category to put on Trump. I'm not sure they are finding it. So if they can't find a negative shorthand expletive that accurately describes Trump, then one could possibly conclude that he doesn't deserve to be so labeled.
I guess you could have something very bad invented in the world that didn't yet have a name. It would still be bad, but you'd have to come up with a name. I'm just not sure that mis-applying an older, historical word is the answer, though. The danger with that is that if the shoe does not fit, then those using the shorthand word will lose authority and lose credibility.
When Trump claims that he is the victim of a Witch Hunt, then changing the definition of Witch may not help things with respect to Trump.
I have to ask, if Trump is evil (and many people think he is), then why isn't there an accurate word out of history to describe him (and/or his movement)?
Personally, I am dead serious when I suggest that Trump is virtually a clone of the Roman Emperor Nero. But then, I can defend that statement. It doesn't require any "shorthand" or re-writing of the dictionary. It is simply a fact that Nero came up with a new way to govern Rome, breaking with his predecessors and appealing directly to the crowd, the mob, the "little people" and gave them goodies that they previously never had been promised. Nero had a very powerful, personal brand that he carefully maintained.
IMHO, Trump fits the mold of Nero but he doesn't fit the mold of Hitler, Franco or Mussolini. I'm not sure about Caligula or Tiberius, etc. etc.
To summarize, it would seem like the opponents of Trump should make accurate criticisms and accurately portray his faults and weaknesses. If he is called "Hitler", then when he doesn't start concentration camps, etc. his opponents will lose their credibility. It's possibly a case of crying "wolf, wolf".
If Trump is so bad, then there should already be words in the English language which can do the job of describing the "evil" which he represents. Re-writing the dictionary just opens up too many problems in my opinion.
But then, fascism was always a general and imprecise label to start with. Many people hid behind it. Maybe it's the best label available. This whole controversy is sort of mind boggling IMHO.
James Lateer