This is the actual comprehensive definition of TDS / Trump Derangement Syndrome.
(All the other definitions appear to be people just throwing mud at each other.)
TDS is a blend of psychological phenomena related to bias, prejudice, and cognitive distortion. It was coined Trump Derangement Syndrome due to the extreme hatred of Donald Trump by the managerial class/establishment and the NPCs and/or low information voters that follow their command.
TL:DR
In simple terms, this phenomenon occurs when someone is so biased that they interpret everything from a person or thing they dislike in the most negative way possible. For instance, if you wave hello and say good morning, they might think your friendly gestures are actually hidden insults or ominous threats. It's a form of "persecutory paranoia" and/or "hostile attribution bias".
Projection issues for those suffering from TDS:
People with TDS often see any neutral or positive stance as covert support for the person they hate, assuming that those who don't share their negative view are hidden supporters. This reinforces their paranoia and resistance to differing viewpoints.
These factors create a syndrome where hatred or bias blinds people to objective information and critical thinking, leading them to embrace propaganda, avoid independent analysis, and cling to their negative views.
(All the other definitions appear to be people just throwing mud at each other.)
TDS is a blend of psychological phenomena related to bias, prejudice, and cognitive distortion. It was coined Trump Derangement Syndrome due to the extreme hatred of Donald Trump by the managerial class/establishment and the NPCs and/or low information voters that follow their command.
TL:DR
In simple terms, this phenomenon occurs when someone is so biased that they interpret everything from a person or thing they dislike in the most negative way possible. For instance, if you wave hello and say good morning, they might think your friendly gestures are actually hidden insults or ominous threats. It's a form of "persecutory paranoia" and/or "hostile attribution bias".
Projection issues for those suffering from TDS:
People with TDS often see any neutral or positive stance as covert support for the person they hate, assuming that those who don't share their negative view are hidden supporters. This reinforces their paranoia and resistance to differing viewpoints.
These factors create a syndrome where hatred or bias blinds people to objective information and critical thinking, leading them to embrace propaganda, avoid independent analysis, and cling to their negative views.
Examples of TDS, Trump Derangement Syndrome:
Simple Example: Sarah, who dislikes John, interprets his friendly “Good morning” and smile as a disguised insult. She believes he’s mocking her, even though his intentions are completely harmless.
Real Life Example: Destiny (YouTube) is a prime example of someone exhibiting extreme TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). (Also see: The Rationalization Hamster)
Simple Example: Sarah, who dislikes John, interprets his friendly “Good morning” and smile as a disguised insult. She believes he’s mocking her, even though his intentions are completely harmless.
Real Life Example: Destiny (YouTube) is a prime example of someone exhibiting extreme TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). (Also see: The Rationalization Hamster)
by ApplesPotatoGardner August 20, 2024
In politics, a dog whistle is the use of coded or suggestive language in political messaging to garner support from a particular group without provoking opposition. The concept is named after ultrasonic dog whistles, which are audible to dogs but not humans.
Something to be aware of; however, is that it is also a slippery slope fallacy in which bad actors can claim any one thing can also mean another thing without having to explain why logically. The counter to this is to ask them to explain how they came to that conclusion, to which, they won't be able to actually explain why logically.
Equating legitimate generalized statements or criticisms and concerns to hate is generally how the Dog Whistle Slippery Slope Fallacy is abused by bad actors looking to put words or intent in their victim's mouths.
This also leads to a circular logic problem where the person injecting the slippery slope dog whistling racist intent into the meaning of a generalized statement will claim everyone who disagrees with them are bigots, and they know they are bigots because they don't agree with their beliefs, therefore those beliefs are correct because all who disagree with them are bigots.
Something to be aware of; however, is that it is also a slippery slope fallacy in which bad actors can claim any one thing can also mean another thing without having to explain why logically. The counter to this is to ask them to explain how they came to that conclusion, to which, they won't be able to actually explain why logically.
Equating legitimate generalized statements or criticisms and concerns to hate is generally how the Dog Whistle Slippery Slope Fallacy is abused by bad actors looking to put words or intent in their victim's mouths.
This also leads to a circular logic problem where the person injecting the slippery slope dog whistling racist intent into the meaning of a generalized statement will claim everyone who disagrees with them are bigots, and they know they are bigots because they don't agree with their beliefs, therefore those beliefs are correct because all who disagree with them are bigots.
Normie: We need to be tougher on crime!
Wokie: That's a racist dog whistle!
Normie: What about it is racist?
Wokie: You're calling for arresting more inserts racial group(s) here that aren't "white".
Normie: How so?
Wokie: Because you're racist! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
Wokie: That's a racist dog whistle!
Normie: What about it is racist?
Wokie: You're calling for arresting more inserts racial group(s) here that aren't "white".
Normie: How so?
Wokie: Because you're racist! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
by ApplesPotatoGardner May 14, 2023
A collective of left-wing Socialist/Marxist YouTubers and their affiliated subreddits. A reference to Anarchist Peter Kropotkin's 1892 book, 'The Conquest of Bread.'
Breadtube presents itself as a platform for well-studied discourse, with its proponents projecting expertise on their chosen topics. However, a prevalent theme among them is a reliance on recurring fallacies, pseudo-economics, sophistry, and, at the extreme end, the endorsement of science denialism and moralizing to justify violence against those they disapprove of. The content often discourages critical thinking, as self-refutation becomes unavoidable. Additionally, a trend of science worship replaces the scientific method. Dissenting opinions within the community are met with swift bans on platforms like Reddit, Imgur, or Discord. In instances where outright banning is not possible, dissenters may face rejection statements, characterized by accusations of moral wrongdoing, casting them as an evil outsider incapable of comprehending the true beliefs of the group.
Breadtube rose to existence for the same reason every sheep needs its herd, and every herd needs its shepherd. Additionally, a significant amount of YouTube money backs it, attracting numerous midwits or those less discerning. While they may portray themselves as the resistance, all of their positions align with the establishment, making them useful idiots whom the establishment undoubtedly appreciates.
Breadtube presents itself as a platform for well-studied discourse, with its proponents projecting expertise on their chosen topics. However, a prevalent theme among them is a reliance on recurring fallacies, pseudo-economics, sophistry, and, at the extreme end, the endorsement of science denialism and moralizing to justify violence against those they disapprove of. The content often discourages critical thinking, as self-refutation becomes unavoidable. Additionally, a trend of science worship replaces the scientific method. Dissenting opinions within the community are met with swift bans on platforms like Reddit, Imgur, or Discord. In instances where outright banning is not possible, dissenters may face rejection statements, characterized by accusations of moral wrongdoing, casting them as an evil outsider incapable of comprehending the true beliefs of the group.
Breadtube rose to existence for the same reason every sheep needs its herd, and every herd needs its shepherd. Additionally, a significant amount of YouTube money backs it, attracting numerous midwits or those less discerning. While they may portray themselves as the resistance, all of their positions align with the establishment, making them useful idiots whom the establishment undoubtedly appreciates.
"The Breadtuber delivered a passionate monologue on leftist ideologies in their latest YouTube video."
by ApplesPotatoGardner December 20, 2023
To destroy something through incompetence while also being oblivious that you are doing so, usually gradually over time.
An unfortunately common issue that arises in many companies and games which often leads to their eventual demise or subjects them to self-mockery, reflecting a departure from their former glory.
An unfortunately common issue that arises in many companies and games which often leads to their eventual demise or subjects them to self-mockery, reflecting a departure from their former glory.
"The once-beloved gaming studio, known for its innovative titles and passionate community, eventually rosewatered into obscurity after succumbing to forced and unintuitive crossover branding. In an attempt to chase short-term profits, the company's decisions, marked by incompetence and a lack of understanding of their core audience, led to a gradual decline, self-mockery, and an ultimate departure from the quality that once defined their games."
See "Blizzard."
See "Ghostcrawler."
See "Magic the Gathering."
See "Blizzard."
See "Ghostcrawler."
See "Magic the Gathering."
by ApplesPotatoGardner October 09, 2023
This type of fallacy is a mix of the "hasty generalization" fallacy and the "association fallacy."
Village Idiot Fallacy: This fallacy occurs when Person A highlights a foolish argument made by Person B and criticizes it. Person A then wrongly assumes that anyone remotely associated with Person B also holds the same foolish belief. This fallacy is often applied to entire groups, especially in online discourse. The term "Village Idiot Fallacy" comes from the idea of pointing to the village idiot and then assuming the entire village shares his beliefs, illustrating guilt by association.
Hasty Generalization: This fallacy occurs when someone makes a broad generalization based on a small or unrepresentative sample. (Person A is making a generalization about a group of people based on the beliefs or actions of one individual, the "village idiot.")
Association Fallacy (Guilt by Association): This occurs when someone asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. (Person A is claiming that the whole group shares the same beliefs and qualities of the "village idiot" simply because they are associated with him.)
Combining these concepts this is how "The Village Idiot Fallacy" manifests itself.
Village Idiot Fallacy: This fallacy occurs when Person A highlights a foolish argument made by Person B and criticizes it. Person A then wrongly assumes that anyone remotely associated with Person B also holds the same foolish belief. This fallacy is often applied to entire groups, especially in online discourse. The term "Village Idiot Fallacy" comes from the idea of pointing to the village idiot and then assuming the entire village shares his beliefs, illustrating guilt by association.
Hasty Generalization: This fallacy occurs when someone makes a broad generalization based on a small or unrepresentative sample. (Person A is making a generalization about a group of people based on the beliefs or actions of one individual, the "village idiot.")
Association Fallacy (Guilt by Association): This occurs when someone asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. (Person A is claiming that the whole group shares the same beliefs and qualities of the "village idiot" simply because they are associated with him.)
Combining these concepts this is how "The Village Idiot Fallacy" manifests itself.
The Village Idiot Fallacy Example:
Person A: "Person B didn't recycle their plastic bottle after lunch. Can you believe that?"
Person A (later): "People from that apartment complex are so irresponsible. They're all like Person B, not caring about the environment at all."
Person A: "Person B didn't recycle their plastic bottle after lunch. Can you believe that?"
Person A (later): "People from that apartment complex are so irresponsible. They're all like Person B, not caring about the environment at all."
by ApplesPotatoGardner July 09, 2024
To mock a midwit using their own bad logic to make an ironic argument in a way they would, but also in a way where most of them will actually agree lest they expose themselves to the wolves that are the other stupider less-aware midwits.
This works so well, because a vast majority of midwits are on the less-aware end and generally care more about agreeing with something they already agree with especially if many other midwits already agree they all agree with it!
Dissenters to the midwits ideals are thus automatically labeled, "bad" for X emotional, fallacious, or nonsensical reasons. Legitimate refutations of takes or disagreements are labeled as "hit-pieces". Anecdotal experiences with a single person from another disagreeing group automatically means that person and anyone who agrees with them is also "bad", etc. The reason The Midwit Trap works so well is to disagree with your agreeing yet mocking take is to open themselves up to the same "out group bad" mentality they and the others they surround themselves with have. This is The Midwit Trap.
This works so well, because a vast majority of midwits are on the less-aware end and generally care more about agreeing with something they already agree with especially if many other midwits already agree they all agree with it!
Dissenters to the midwits ideals are thus automatically labeled, "bad" for X emotional, fallacious, or nonsensical reasons. Legitimate refutations of takes or disagreements are labeled as "hit-pieces". Anecdotal experiences with a single person from another disagreeing group automatically means that person and anyone who agrees with them is also "bad", etc. The reason The Midwit Trap works so well is to disagree with your agreeing yet mocking take is to open themselves up to the same "out group bad" mentality they and the others they surround themselves with have. This is The Midwit Trap.
An example of executing The Midwit Trap: Responding to a midwit online with "I agree." updoot and all, and then use the most openly blatantly stupid midwit logic they all would use to come to a conclusion that they would actually agree with. The trick here is the argument has to be so openly blatantly stupid/circular/hypocritical that even some of the midwits might notice. The trick here is it will never be the majority of the hivemind so any midwits who actually do notice and call you out, you can just turn around and throw them to the wolves that are the other 90% of midwits who were too dumb to get it. By doing this they will now be labeled as part of the out-group and therefore in the hivemind of the midwits, bad.
by ApplesPotatoGardner October 16, 2023
Woke progessive leftist, and current podcaster on Youtube. He created and hosted the half-hour truTV show Adam Ruins Everything, based on the CollegeHumor series of the same name.
Adam has faced significant criticism for being perceived as entrenched in a 'woke' ideology, leading to accusations of science denialism. Critics argue that he selectively chooses experts, distorts data, and promotes a form of "science worship" while maintaining an appearance of objectivity. Despite asserting the factual basis of his views, he is accused of neglecting dissenting evidence and failing to withstand scrutiny, as demonstrated during his appearance on the Joe Rogan show where his ideology quickly unraveled. Instead of engaging in open debate, he is seen hosting a podcast that serves as a platform for reinforcing woke ideologies among the like-minded, akin to a Sunday church meeting.
Adam has faced significant criticism for being perceived as entrenched in a 'woke' ideology, leading to accusations of science denialism. Critics argue that he selectively chooses experts, distorts data, and promotes a form of "science worship" while maintaining an appearance of objectivity. Despite asserting the factual basis of his views, he is accused of neglecting dissenting evidence and failing to withstand scrutiny, as demonstrated during his appearance on the Joe Rogan show where his ideology quickly unraveled. Instead of engaging in open debate, he is seen hosting a podcast that serves as a platform for reinforcing woke ideologies among the like-minded, akin to a Sunday church meeting.
Regular Guy #1: Did you see Adam Conover ruined billionaires?
Regular Guy #2: Doesn't that dude have like 100 million dollars?
Regular Guy #1: Only people who are richer than him are automatically bad, as is anyone who disagrees with his ideas.
Regular Guy #2: Classic woke lefty cultist behavior.
Regular Guy #2: Doesn't that dude have like 100 million dollars?
Regular Guy #1: Only people who are richer than him are automatically bad, as is anyone who disagrees with his ideas.
Regular Guy #2: Classic woke lefty cultist behavior.
by ApplesPotatoGardner December 31, 2023