Harper Derangement Syndrome: an analysis

There is a phrase some of you may have noticed that right wingers like to fling about lately. "Harper Derangement Syndrome" seems to be the new "Yeah, well, sez you!" and it is replacing the usual slurs the twitter CPC trolls view as valid comebacks to facts and evidence. I expect they feel it makes them sound clever, while dismissing Harper critics.  But let's unpack this a bit.

Origins

The term did not originate in Canada. It was coined by an American journalist, Charles Krauthammer. Mr. Krauthammer spent part of his childhood in Montreal, and part in France. He studied psychiatry and is a licenced physician. He is a conservative, but a moderate one, opposing the death penalty and supporting legal abortion. He came up with the phrase "Bush Derangement Syndrome" in 2003, to describe the visceral hatred expressed by many Americans towards then-President George W. Bush. It can be argued that a lot of the world felt the same way about Bush by 2003. 

Indeed, if you read the original article, it seems pretty clear that Krauthammer's tongue was firmly in his cheek. That the American right wing seized upon it as proof that critics of Bush's administration were suffering from a mental illness is as much evidence of their lack of grasp of satire as anything else.

Then, in 2011, a right-wing Canadian journalist adapted the term to describe critics of Harper's administration. Again, his article is satirical. Again, the right wing pounced on the idea that Harper critics are suffering from a mental illness. 

Encouraged by the writings of such Conservative luminaries as Anthony Furey and Brian Lilley both associated with SUN Media, and Peter Foster of the Financial Post, the trolls on social media and in online comments sections have latched onto the phrase as one of their favourite slurs.

Impacts and Analysis

 On the up-side, it's a sort of refreshing change to be accused of having HDS, instead of the usual string of slurs and indictments based on sexual orientation (e.g. "stupid dyke"), sexual interest (e.g. "frigid bitch"), political outlook (e.g. "f*cking commie"), intelligence (e.g. you're a f*cking moron!"), etc... Indeed, nearly everything they type says far more about themselves than the reality of the recipient of these remarks.

And so it is with HDS. That they are having such fun accusing those who disagree with them of having a mental illness, using that accusation as both mocking and condemnation, offers a glimpse into how they regard those with real mental illnesses. 

There have always been those, particularly in repressive societies, who would impugn the intelligence or sanity of those with the temerity to disagree with authority. If you have an interest in reading how this has been used to control dissent by governments around the world, there is an extensive essay (with citations) available on Wikipedia on the political abuse of psychiatric diagnosis. China, the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the United States and others all have histories of using psychiatric diagnosis to discredit or incarcerate those who disagreed with the ruling class. 

And don't forget, it was not until 1973 that the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder.


Those who see things clearly, despite mass communication of an opposing view, have often been regarded as peculiar or ill. Looking at the Harper years from the viewpoint of clarity, fact-checking, and referring to external and unbiased sources of information, it might appear that those who cling to the idea that Harper is the best PM ever, and deny any deviation from the CPC party line, even when presented with irrefutable evidence to the contrary, are the ones suffering from some sort of delusion. A willful ignorance, perhaps... It is puzzling indeed.