Gaslighting is a form of psychological cruelty where one seeds the sows of doubt by manipulating them into questioning their own memory, perception, and sanity. It comes from a 1940's play (Gaslight) and later movie (Angel Street) where a husband tries to convince his wife and others that she is insane by manipulating things in her environment (like dimming the gaslights in the house), then insisting that she is delusional when she points it out. The term has been popular since the 1960's, and the practice by the left in politics goes back much further to ideas like the Nazi's "the big lie" techniques, propaganda and the ministry of truth: not only lying about an issue, but trying to convince the other side that they're insane for even thinking it.
|Gaslighting||Gaslighting is evil. Not only is it a double standard, but it's trying to convince the other side that they're mentally unstable for even thinking it. Republicans did it first under Newt Gingrich, or Donald Trump.||Trump isn't gaslighting, he's bloviating -- and the Clinton's are infamous for this technique. But it goes back way further, in politics and history. But the left is blind to their use of the technique far more often than the other side would try. See Alternate History or Alternate Reality for a few examples.|
The Democrats and their media loves to portray the right as instigators of it -- which is evidence of them doing it. Either they are completely ignorant about their own history and use of the technique (which I doubt), or they know of it and are suppressing it. Maurine Dowd used it against those complaining about Clinton (like Newt Gingrich), and trying to get hm to say hysterical things, or Donald Trump's obnoxious style of overstating everything. But they ignore that the complains against Bill and Hillary Clinton were valid, and that Hillary Clinton alone has many examples of gaslighting... not to mention many more before or since against the left: 9 items
|Russian Hackers - CNN and other FakeNews sites repeating that the Russian hacked the election (at Hillary campaigns behest), that Russians collaborated with Trump, that they manipulated the election, the only "evidence" they had were vaporous claims from anonymous sources that never materialized or pass scrutiny. While there was hard evidence of Hillary and Democrats colluding with Russians. So Dems/their Media just created this attack as an excuse to distract away from their actions in rigging the primary, fumbling the election, and then gaslit anyone who would question their narrative.
|Hillary Quotes - |
|Hillary Clinton: What Happened? - Hillary's book was a spiteful, divisive, finger-pointing-fest. It was everyone else's fault but her. Of course, she had some fake apologies like, I should have campaigned harder, or how it was her fault because the others didn't understand how brilliant she was, and so on. But it was as tone deaf as her campaign, and it was an attempt to gaslight anyone that would question her version of events.
|Hillary Clinton: Go-Awaygate - |
|Hillary Clinton: Divulges Nuclear Response Times - |
Does this really matter? Probably not much. They could approximate and guess at the time, it's just nice to have hard confirmation of your intelligence. But this was a far bigger deal than anything Trump has done wrt talking to the Russians about cooperating on terror, and mentioning what the newspapers had already published about how terrorists were trying to create laptop-bombs to target airplanes -- and they made a huge deal out of the latter, to gaslight anyone who knew better. So if that's our standard of guilt, then Hillary should be in Leavenworth. (I've yet to find a standard of behavior applied to Trump that doesn't make Hillary worse). Pick one standard.
|Hillary Clinton: Bimbo squad - |
|Hillary Clinton: Attacked a 12 year old rape victim - |
|Birth of Birthers - |
|2019.04.12 Some People - Ilhan Omar was on video saying the terrorist supporting, anti-semitic CAIR, was founded because they recognized "Some people did something", meaning Islamic Terrorists took down the Twin Towers on 9/11. Fair was actually founded nearly a decade earlier. President Trump tweeted the video because it shows the truth about the left's PC apologism for 9/11. The left couldn't argue the facts, so they put their lie-machine in overdrive. WaPo FakeNews'ed by trying to claim that Bush said it too... before we'd identified the source of the attack (as if the context was the same). Atlantic tried to deflect for her. Other operatives for the DNC pretended that Trump was inciting violence or islamaphobia by showing the video of Ilhan's own words. This is moronic, the Republicans love her! She's the poster-child for stupid, racist (anti-Semitic), Politically Correct terrorist apologism. They need her to run-against in 2020. They're more likely to hire a security detail for her, than wish any harm on her. But still, Dems started a "#IStandWithIlhan", and cries about poor her, for having her own message magnified. The fake pearl clutching is an insult to our intelligence, and is obvious gaslighting.
That's just the tip of the iceberg: the whole Alternate History area has a few more examples. Not to mention getting into the much larger Alternate Reality or Left Lies section, where on many of these, they won't only lie about something -- but will attack anyone as not being in touch with reality, or being a shill for the opposition party (or Russians) if they try to point out the real history or version of events.
Again, it's one thing to disagree on what we think the likely outcome on something will be. I have no problems with that kind of political discord. We're talking about a much further extreme where you question the morality or sanity of those who disagree. By nature of the left being a more extreme ideology, more emotion based, and thinking they're morally superior, and having a lot more youth -- they tend to go there far, far, far more often than the other side could try, let alone get away with, with the bulk of the media and academia leaning far-left and being against them.