Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve had an email debate with a Biden supporter who objected to one of my articles on American Thinker. We’ll call him Lloyd. It’s proven to be a fascinating window into the thinking of those who supported Biden in the last election.
I always thought “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS) was a funny way to describe the enthusiasm with which the left detests Donald Trump. However, after my interaction with Lloyd, I get it now. TDS is a real malady — created by the gaslighting and propaganda of the left. Those suffering from it don’t just hate Donald Trump, they’ve fabricated an irrational worldview to justify that hatred. It is truly deranged. To move forward as a nation, we need to understand it and develop strategies to deprogram those afflicted with it.
I’ll start with the text of my correspondence with Lloyd, and then we’ll unpack it.
Me: I’m optimistic that the majority of Americans do not support tyranny and will resist the changes that the left is attempting to impose on us.
Lloyd: Sorry John…if you believed that you would never have voted for a guy who called himself the King of The Jews, encouraged his supporters to attack congresspeople, nor you know joked about staying for 12 years. That seems more like tyranny to me. You can hate Biden all you want…if he loses, he won’t pull that crap Trump did and you also know that if Biden stays for 8 years, he won’t overturn the constitution to get 12. What you really hate is that you’re in the minority and you’ll never get your way again and will use tyranny to achieve your ends.
Me: You are misinformed. Trump never told his supporters to attack congresspeople. He told them to peacefully protest. Also, you must have missed the news on January 20. The military didn’t remove Trump. After exhausting all legal means to protest the election, he left voluntarily. He was mad, but he left. So, you’re saying that bad jokes and compliance with the Constitution (even under protest) are signs of tyranny?
Lloyd: That’s because if he didn’t [leave] he would have been frog marched out of there…the military didn’t support him so he had no choice. And what about that bomber today is he a lone wolf as well? [a reference to the Floyd Ray Roseberry incident]
Me: What about James Hodgkinson [the man who attempted to murder Steve Scalise]?
Lloyd: Bernie Bros for the most part didn’t support Hillary nor Biden. Half of them wanted Trump because they felt he’d lead to their socialist utopia.
Me: Oh, you’re a Biden supporter! Well in that case, how do you feel about his administration working with big tech to censor social media and text messages? How about hiring private contractors to do warrantless surveillance on private citizens?
Lloyd: The censoring is being done by private companies. As for the surveillance, if it was only black and brown people you wouldn’t even care. And BTW they’ve done that to black and brown people for decades all the way back to MLK.
So, there you have it. According to Lloyd, Donald Trump is a tyrant because he told a couple of jokes and because Lloyd believes he incited an attack on congressmen. Lloyd is unswayed by the fact that Trump specifically told his supporters to protest peacefully.
Even though Donald Trump left office peacefully, he’s still guilty of violating the term limits imposed by the Constitution. Trump the tyrant is guilty of what Lloyd believes he would have done, regardless of what he actually did. Evidence to the contrary is irrelevant because Lloyd knows what President Trump would have done if he could.
Note that Lloyd also holds Trump responsible for the Floyd Ray Roseberry incident. Roseberry is the disturbed individual who parked his truck in the capital on August 19th and threatened to set off bombs unless he was allowed to talk to Joe Biden. It was later discovered that Roseberry had no bombs or other weapons. But a neighbor had seen him wear a MAGA hat once, so Trump had obviously put him up to it — another act of tyranny I suppose.
Interestingly, Trump is apparently also at fault for the nut who attacked the Republican softball team — James Hodgkinson. So, if someone is upset with a Democrat administration and demanding answers, it’s Trump’s fault. If someone else attempts to assassinate Republicans, that’s also Trump’s fault. Got it.
According to Lloyd, censorship and unwarranted surveillance of citizens — true acts of tyranny — are perfectly okay if done by private companies. Who knew that the government can circumvent the restrictions of the constitution by merely hiring private contractors to do their dirty work? The subcontracting exemption to the Constitution must be emanating from a penumbra that the Supreme Court hasn’t discovered yet.
Note also that Lloyd is unconcerned about warrantless surveillance because the government has been doing it against people of color for decades. I’m guessing Lloyd is down with the whole “systemic racism” narrative. But is he saying that since it happened to people of color in the past, it’s okay if it’s now being done to people not of color — as in privileged whites? That sounds a little like revenge as a form of atonement for past wrongs. It’s also an argument that two wrongs make a right.
And finally, the debate ended just as most debates do with leftists — with Lloyd calling me a racist. Just as he did with Donald Trump, he claimed to know what is in my heart and mind. He asserted that I wouldn’t care if it was only people of color being wronged. He didn’t use the word racist, but that’s what he called me nonetheless. Why do supporters of Democrats always go there? Does the fact that they do, say more about them than it does about us?
To summarize Lloyd’s position:
- Offensive words are tyranny
- People’s actions are irrelevant if thought crimes are suspected
- Civil rights only apply conditionally
- When challenged with logic, the challenger is racist
When someone doesn’t form opinions on the basis of facts, but rather interprets facts to fit their own biases, their worldview is distorted. Rather than observing the world as it is, they are embracing their biases, rationalizing them, and twisting reality to fit those biases.
As I’ve asserted in the past, debate will never succeed at changing the minds of people like Lloyd. Successful debate requires both parties to adhere to a framework of logic. If either party places more validity in their biases than in reality, debate is pointless. We need to find some other way to win them over. We need to appeal to their emotions, not their reasoning.
By: John Green, Blue State Conservative
John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He currently writes at the American Free News Network (americanfreenewsnetwork.org). He can be followed on Facebook or reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
This article was first published by American Thinker.