3 ms·

Can we stop normalizing the bizarre and childish rename of the us defense department?

by mslt 7mo ago

tombert 7mo ago
I find it amusing that Trump ran with the promise of "no new wars", and then immediately tries to change the Department of Defense to the Department of War. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by a hollow promise from Trump at this point.
- panarky 7mo ago
  I find it amusing that Franco ran with the promise of "justice for those with clean hands," and then immediately enacted the Law of Political Responsibilities to institutionalize the summary execution of tens of thousands of his political opponents. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by a hollow promise from Franco at this point.
  - logicchains 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    - panarky 7mo ago
      That's what they always say. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Political_Responsibilities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Political_Responsibilit...
- patates 7mo ago
  As an outsider, the extent and depth of the contradictions are really fascinating, OTOH repeated to the point that nothing surprises anyone anymore. I keep thinking what's the psychology behind this that makes it work and if they are mostly in on the act or if they really rely on many "useful idiots" like their political opponents keep suggesting. The discussion around useful idiots became concerning for me as I'm learning to respect people even in the most "don't look up"-like situations, trying to understand their individual motives without judging them. The main problem in political discussions, I figured, is the fact that we have 2-3 groups we try to fit people into. Wow, I made that digress quickly :)
  - gostsamo 7mo ago
    Unfortunately, useful idiot is a valid phenomena but much of what we observe in the US is disempowerment. The congress people believe that they don't have power outside the president's benevolence and hence does not assert their constitutional powers. The constitutional court is either partisan or outright corrupt and does not work as a corrective. The execution branch are ready to serve the president and not their assigned duties or the law. Many ordinary voters do not feel personal responsibility for acting, but prefer to rely on whoever promises them emotional validation instead of forming and empowering their communities. This is not a single thing, this is a combination of effects that influence and amplify each other.
nnkk8 7mo ago
[flagged]
- georgemcbay 7mo ago
  > why. unlike with the gulf of mexico, in this case they have full naming rights. They actually don't. The official name is still the Department of Defense and only Congress can approve a real name change. The Trump Executive Order just gives the department permission to use the Department of War name without actually changing the name of the department from the Department of Defense. That said, despite being anti-Trump I'm fine with calling it the Department of War, it seems a lot more honest.
  - defrost 7mo ago
    His naming of the Bored of Peace was also foot forward and eerily prescient.
- mslt 7mo ago
  Because they used millions of dollars of American citizens’ tax revenue to make a meaningless edgelord gesture, amongst a myriad of other reasons why it’s a bizarre and childish thing to do. Stopping there because this isn’t Reddit
  - kingkawn 7mo ago
    It’s not meaningless; it’s a way for them to immediately prove that the person speaking has been intimidated enough by them to acquiesce to this absurdity. If they don’t, they can be punished just for refusing. If they do, they’re already back on their heels proving their willingness to cave on anything else.
- Sniffnoy 7mo ago
  Ah, but who's "they"? Names of departments are determined by Congress, and Congress has not renamed the DoD. The executive branch does not normally determine the names of its own departments. If you imagine the American government to be a single coherent entity, one might say "they have full naming rights", but it isn't, and in this case, the part doing the rename isn't the part that properly has the power to do so!
dijit 7mo ago
I think its rather apt. I welcome the de-1984-ification of governmental functions. Its clear that Trump wants to be at war, with their interventions, so, why not?
- mslt 7mo ago
  It’s fine that a secondary consequence is them showing their foolish hand; I’ll give you that, but this not normal and should not just be absorbed as though it’s normal and that’s just what we call it now
  - llmthrow0827 7mo ago
    Trump isn't doing anything out of the ordinary for an American president, so I would say it is indeed quite normal. If by "not normal" you mean "not acceptable" then I agree, but that doesn't change that "Department of War" is more correct than "Department of Defense"
    - andruby 7mo ago
      > Trump isn't doing anything out of the ordinary for an American president I'm sorry, but I think both parties would actually agree on the fact that Trump is doing a lot of "out of the ordinary" for an American president. No other president after WWII has reduced federal workforce by >8% (DOGE), and then rehired a bunch. No other US president ordered the capturing a head of state (Venezuela) and framed it as a law enforcement action. No president has ignored congress or the constitution like Trump has (tariffs, ICE, Greenland). He uses executive orders a lot more than previous presidents: ~209 per year in his 2nd term. The next highest are Truman (113/year), Carter (80/year) and Kennedy (75/year).
      - llmthrow0827 7mo ago
        I think it's pretty clear I was referring to the topic at hand, which is regards to military action and the Department of Defense/War naming.
selfawareMammal 7mo ago
Nah. The current one is in fact more accurate.
- robbomacrae 7mo ago
  Genuinely surprised they didn't try to get away with department of peace.
- bbor 7mo ago
  The "current one" is Department of Defense. They are illegally branding it otherwise without congressional approval, but that doesn't mean we should welcome it. More fundamentally, it's hard to convey just how much better a government that wages wars but ostensibly says that they're bad is than a government that gleefully does so. I'll take a flawed democracy that partakes in immoral operations over an openly-imperialist autocracy any day of the week -- as should we all!

Can we stop normalizing the bizarre and childish rename of the us defense department?

by mslt 7mo ago

Can we stop normalizing the bizarre and childish rename of the us defense department?

I find it amusing that Trump ran with the promise of "no new wars", and then immediately tries to change the Department of Defense to the Department of War. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by a hollow promise from Trump at this point.

panarky 7mo ago
I find it amusing that Franco ran with the promise of "justice for those with clean hands," and then immediately enacted the Law of Political Responsibilities to institutionalize the summary execution of tens of thousands of his political opponents. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by a hollow promise from Franco at this point.
- logicchains 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - panarky 7mo ago
    That's what they always say. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Political_Responsibilities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Political_Responsibilit...
patates 7mo ago
As an outsider, the extent and depth of the contradictions are really fascinating, OTOH repeated to the point that nothing surprises anyone anymore. I keep thinking what's the psychology behind this that makes it work and if they are mostly in on the act or if they really rely on many "useful idiots" like their political opponents keep suggesting. The discussion around useful idiots became concerning for me as I'm learning to respect people even in the most "don't look up"-like situations, trying to understand their individual motives without judging them. The main problem in political discussions, I figured, is the fact that we have 2-3 groups we try to fit people into. Wow, I made that digress quickly :)
- gostsamo 7mo ago
  Unfortunately, useful idiot is a valid phenomena but much of what we observe in the US is disempowerment. The congress people believe that they don't have power outside the president's benevolence and hence does not assert their constitutional powers. The constitutional court is either partisan or outright corrupt and does not work as a corrective. The execution branch are ready to serve the president and not their assigned duties or the law. Many ordinary voters do not feel personal responsibility for acting, but prefer to rely on whoever promises them emotional validation instead of forming and empowering their communities. This is not a single thing, this is a combination of effects that influence and amplify each other.

nnkk8 7mo ago

[flagged]

georgemcbay 7mo ago
> why. unlike with the gulf of mexico, in this case they have full naming rights. They actually don't. The official name is still the Department of Defense and only Congress can approve a real name change. The Trump Executive Order just gives the department permission to use the Department of War name without actually changing the name of the department from the Department of Defense. That said, despite being anti-Trump I'm fine with calling it the Department of War, it seems a lot more honest.
- defrost 7mo ago
  His naming of the Bored of Peace was also foot forward and eerily prescient.
mslt 7mo ago
Because they used millions of dollars of American citizens’ tax revenue to make a meaningless edgelord gesture, amongst a myriad of other reasons why it’s a bizarre and childish thing to do. Stopping there because this isn’t Reddit
- kingkawn 7mo ago
  It’s not meaningless; it’s a way for them to immediately prove that the person speaking has been intimidated enough by them to acquiesce to this absurdity. If they don’t, they can be punished just for refusing. If they do, they’re already back on their heels proving their willingness to cave on anything else.
Sniffnoy 7mo ago
Ah, but who's "they"? Names of departments are determined by Congress, and Congress has not renamed the DoD. The executive branch does not normally determine the names of its own departments. If you imagine the American government to be a single coherent entity, one might say "they have full naming rights", but it isn't, and in this case, the part doing the rename isn't the part that properly has the power to do so!

dijit 7mo ago

I think its rather apt. I welcome the de-1984-ification of governmental functions. Its clear that Trump wants to be at war, with their interventions, so, why not?

mslt 7mo ago
It’s fine that a secondary consequence is them showing their foolish hand; I’ll give you that, but this not normal and should not just be absorbed as though it’s normal and that’s just what we call it now
- llmthrow0827 7mo ago
  Trump isn't doing anything out of the ordinary for an American president, so I would say it is indeed quite normal. If by "not normal" you mean "not acceptable" then I agree, but that doesn't change that "Department of War" is more correct than "Department of Defense"
  - andruby 7mo ago
    > Trump isn't doing anything out of the ordinary for an American president I'm sorry, but I think both parties would actually agree on the fact that Trump is doing a lot of "out of the ordinary" for an American president. No other president after WWII has reduced federal workforce by >8% (DOGE), and then rehired a bunch. No other US president ordered the capturing a head of state (Venezuela) and framed it as a law enforcement action. No president has ignored congress or the constitution like Trump has (tariffs, ICE, Greenland). He uses executive orders a lot more than previous presidents: ~209 per year in his 2nd term. The next highest are Truman (113/year), Carter (80/year) and Kennedy (75/year).
    - llmthrow0827 7mo ago
      I think it's pretty clear I was referring to the topic at hand, which is regards to military action and the Department of Defense/War naming.

selfawareMammal 7mo ago

Nah. The current one is in fact more accurate.

robbomacrae 7mo ago
Genuinely surprised they didn't try to get away with department of peace.
bbor 7mo ago
The "current one" is Department of Defense. They are illegally branding it otherwise without congressional approval, but that doesn't mean we should welcome it. More fundamentally, it's hard to convey just how much better a government that wages wars but ostensibly says that they're bad is than a government that gleefully does so. I'll take a flawed democracy that partakes in immoral operations over an openly-imperialist autocracy any day of the week -- as should we all!