Showing posts sorted by relevance for query GASLIGHTING. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query GASLIGHTING. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, November 28, 2022

What headline? 'Gaslighting' is Merriam-Webster's word of 2022

Leanne Italie
Nov 28 2022

“Gaslighting” – mind manipulating, grossly misleading, downright deceitful – is Merriam-Webster's word of the year.

Lookups for the word on the US-based merriam-webster.com increased 1740% in 2022 over the year before. But something else happened. There wasn't a single event that drove significant spikes in the curiosity, as it usually goes with the chosen word of the year.

The gaslighting was pervasive.

“It’s a word that has risen so quickly in the English language, and especially in the last four years, that it actually came as a surprise to me and to many of us,” said Peter Sokolowski, Merriam-Webster's editor at large, in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press.





















Profile By Gaslight An Irregular Reader About The Private Life Of Sherlock Holmes
by Edgar W. Smith
Publication date 1944

Monday, July 26, 2021

Strangers on a train: The dark bargain that destroyed the Republican Party


CNN screenshots

Kirk Swearingen,
 Salon
July 24, 2021

This article first appeared in Salon.

As the Republican Party continues on its march toward fascism, it's easy to find yourself making political connections — even when you are trying your best not to think about politics.

Recently I was reading about astrophysics (understanding only an infinitesimal amount) and saw the Republican Party's implosion into Trumpism as akin to the formation of a black hole in space, where truth (instead of light) is unable to escape the event horizon.

I found myself in the same frame of mind while watching Alfred Hitchcock's 1951 classic "Strangers on a Train," about a couple of men falling into a conversation and making an unholy bargain, which one of them thinks is a macabre intellectual exercise not to be taken seriously.

Falling back into the dream of the film, I could not help but see the conniving, unhinged Bruno Antony (brilliantly played by Robert Walker) as a precursor of Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Ron Johnson and their ilk, those who have managed to kill off the old Republican Party and who are hard at work to murder majority-rule democracy — both through voter suppression and by inciting actual violence. For me, Guy Haines (played by Farley Granger) represented Republicans I understood, at least to a degree: Nelson Rockefeller, George H.W. Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney. To me, those Republicans might have been willing to take advantage of others and perhaps stretch the law to avoid taxes or otherwise enrich themselves, but they would likely have ruminated over it and made sure to attend church service soon after banking the profits. In any case, they believed in the necessity of compromise, the work inherent in politics.

These are the so-called RINOs, or "Republicans in name only," a term which — now that I consider it — was always a form of gaslighting and projection. That term has been used to attack actual Republicans and make them seem like another group Trump voters could despise and blame for their failings and bad impulses — another "other." Newt Gingrich and his chortling crew sent the Republicans who understood that compromise was the way of politics (and who, it ought to be said, also took their oaths of office seriously) the way of the Oldsmobile. It was a Swift Boat operation done on their own people. We could all see they were Republicans, but we were told they were somehow not Republicans, or at least not real Republicans — they were RINOs. The fake Republicans pushed out the real ones.

And there it was: Gaslighting — the favored authoritarian manipulation of "don't believe what you see with your own eyes" — so named for the 1944 film "Gaslight" (directed by George Cukor with Hitchcockian flair), in which a criminal, played by Charles Boyer, purposively undermines the mental health of his wife (Ingrid Bergman, who won an Oscar for the role) by lying to her endlessly and saying that things she has seen with her own eyes are not true. You know, like Donald Trump has done to the public for years — indeed, for his entire adult life.

The overarching gaslighting that the modern Republican Party continues to perpetrate on the American public is that good old yarn about how lowering taxes for the wealthy and corporations will boost the economy — the so-called trickle-down theory, which George H.W. Bush memorably called "voodoo economics," before he was selected as Ronald Reagan's running mate, at least partly to shut him up. It always brings to mind something economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote:
The modern conservative is not even especially modern. He is engaged, on the contrary, in one of man's oldest, best financed, most applauded, and, on the whole, least successful exercises in moral philosophy. That is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

The actual Republicans — who we are told by the likes of Matt Gaetz are not the actual Republicans — must have thought back in the Tea Party days that the Gingrich plan, the treat-the-opposition-as-your-enemy, shut-down-the-government, win-at-all-costs faction, would be a temporary thing, something to be countenanced for a short time. They clearly felt the same way about the antics of Donald Trump. It was all just kind of an unsettling joke, as Guy Haines thought of Bruno's proposed bargain to trade murders.

In the film, Bruno crashes a party and nearly strangles a woman while re-enacting the murder he has committed, which might remind anyone old enough both of Gingrich's crashing the GOP with his "Contract With America" (often referred to then as "Contract on America") and of the equally oddly named Grover Norquist, co-author of the "Contract," who often said he wanted a government small enough that he could drown it in the bathtub. (That phrasing seemed pretty personal — there's more than a hint of gruesome domestic violence in there.)

What Gingrich and Norquist brought to the party was the end of what used to be called "political comity" — seeing beyond different political positions and working together professionally to reach compromise. You know — pretty much the substance of politics.

There is a scene, both funny and unsettling, in "Strangers on a Train" in which Bruno and his mother (the memorable Marion Lorne, in her film debut) have a chance to catch up, and we learn a good deal about how Bruno became the person he is now. She fusses about his health and his attitude, remarking to her son that at least he had given up on his crazy earlier plan:

Mother: Now, you haven't been doing anything foolish?

[Bruno shakes his head while nuzzling her hand.]

Mother: Well, I do hope you've forgotten all about that silly little plan of yours.
Bruno: Which one?

Mother: About, um, blowing up the White House.

Bruno: Oh, ma, I was only fooling. Besides, what would the president say?

Mother [laughing with relief]: Oh, you're a naughty boy, Bruno! Well, you can always make me laugh.

When the film was made, the politics of the day were focused on the Cold War and distrust of anyone who might be sympathetic to the "other side." Looking at the film today, who could doubt that Bruno, like far too many Republicans, might be a QAnon believer, as well as a delighted supporter of Trump's Big Lie about the election, shrugging off the lack of any evidence while pointing to Chinese and Russian conspiracy websites. (In the film, Bruno works assiduously to plant evidence to tie Granger to the murder that Bruno actually committed.) Bruno would have been delighted to help with the planning for the insurrection of Jan. 6 and would have cheered others on from a discreet distance. And he would just as cheerfully deny everything he'd done. You can never pin down a psychopath. As we all know now, it is not possible to hold the shameless to account. They just cry persecution.

The images of the fight on the merry-go-round — sent into overdrive by a policeman who shoots indiscriminately, killing the carny operating the ride — are unforgettable. Granger's character, like, say, Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney, is trying desperately to hang on as Bruno kicks at his hands and the whole contraption seems about to break apart. It does, at least until a carnival employee crawls beneath the carousel to reach the controls, too late to save the ride and some of its passengers.

One story concerning the making of "Strangers on a Train," as told by Ben Mankiewicz on Turner Classic Movies, is that Hitchcock was haunted by his decision to allow the man to crawl under the frantically spinning merry-go-round. For years afterward, Hitchcock said, he got sweaty palms every time he thought about that day. If Donald Trump is directing this insurrectionist flick now in production from Mar-a-Lago Studios, he's more than happy to sacrifice anyone and everyone.

The old GOP is going the way of that merry-go-round, and even if someone were to try to get to the controls now (Who? The Lincoln Project? The Bulwark?) it seems too late to save anything worthy of a democratic republic. Conservatives who are not pro-white supremacy, pro-conspiracy, anti-science, and chock-full of grievances will need to create a new political party someday — and get themselves out of the carnival business, with its glaring lights, mesmerizing sounds and untrustworthy machinery.

Thursday, December 07, 2023

Matt Gaetz accuses media of ‘greenlighting’ Trump assassination


Gustaf Kilander
Tue, 5 December 2023

Far-right Florida Rep Matt Gaetz has claimed that the press is “green-lighting” the assassination of former President Donald Trump by reporting on what a second Trump term would look like.

On Monday, Mr Gaetz tweeted “They’re obviously green-lighting assassination” and included a screenshot from a Washington Post op-ed by Post Opinions contributing editor Robert Kagan bearing the headline “A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending”.

Responding to Mr Gaetz, Condé Nast Legal Affairs Editor Luke Zaleski noted that “There is nothing you can say or do to confront Maga gaslighting that won’t be met with more MAGA gaslighting”.

“They’ll say anything to make themselves the victim and hero in everything. And there is nothing you can say to do anything about it. That is the MAGA gaslighting paradox,” he added.

The image for the op-ed was a split image with the top being the head of a statue of Roman dictator Julius Ceaser, who was assassinated in 44BC, and the bottom being the face of Mr Trump.

Mr Kagan writes that “the national mood less than a year before the election is one of bipartisan disgust with the political system in general. Rarely in American history has democracy’s inherent messiness been more striking”.

“In Weimar Germany, Hitler and other agitators benefited from the squabbling of the democratic parties, right and left, the endless fights over the budget, the logjams in the legislature, the fragile and fractious coalitions,” he added. “German voters increasingly yearned for someone to cut through it all and get something — anything — done. It didn’t matter who was behind the political paralysis, either, whether the intransigence came from the right or the left.”

The Post editor goes on to say that the “likeliest outcome” of Mr Trump’s many upcoming trials “will be to demonstrate our judicial system’s inability to contain someone like Trump and, incidentally, to reveal its impotence as a check should he become president”.



“Indicting Trump for trying to overthrow the government will prove akin to indicting Caesar for crossing the Rubicon, and just as effective. Like Caesar, Trump wields a clout that transcends the laws and institutions of government, based on the unswerving personal loyalty of his army of followers,” he adds.

Mr Kagan argues that if Mr Trump wins in 2024, he’ll “become the most powerful person ever to hold that office” with the “fewest constraints of any president, fewer even than in his own first term”.

“Would he even obey a directive of the Supreme Court? Or would he instead ask how many armored divisions the chief justice has?” he asks.

“Trump might not want or need a third term, but were he to decide he wanted one, as he has sometimes indicated, would the 22nd Amendment block him any more effectively from being president for life than the Supreme Court, if he refused to be blocked?” Mr Kagan notes.

“Today, there is the whiff of a new McCarthyism in the air,” he adds, noting the many baseless accusations of those not on Mr Trump’s side being “communists”.

“The Trump dictatorship will not be a communist tyranny, where almost everyone feels the oppression and has their lives shaped by it,” Mr Kagan goes on to say. “In conservative, anti-liberal tyrannies, ordinary people face all kinds of limitations on their freedoms, but it is a problem for them only to the degree that they value those freedoms, and many people do not ... if most Americans can go about their daily business, they might not care, just as many Russians and Hungarians do not care.”

Mr Gaetz’s followers on X were quick to respond with outrage.

Auron MacIntyre, a columnist at the rightwing outlet The Blaze, wrote: “Nobody talks about it but there were already assassination attempts on Trump. When Trump inevitably becomes the nominee you are going to watch the very last shred of sanity break in the media.”

He didn’t provide any evidence for his claims.

Failed GOP 2022 Arizona gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake simply called The Post “despicable”.

Sunday, April 28, 2024

Manipulation Politics: Israeli Gaslighting in the United States  


 
 APRIL 26, 2024
Facebook

Photograph Source: U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv – CC BY 2.0

The Middle East will not be the same in the wake of 7 October 2023. More was breached on that day than the prison wall that Palestinian fighters burst through.  The fantasy Israel has staged-managed, and the United States has parroted, for over seven decades has finally seen the light of day.  The global community can no longer be gaslit.

Merriam-Webster defines gaslighting as “the act of grossly misleading someone especially for one’s own advantage.”  The term has resonance for what Israel and the United States have successfully done over a number of generations—create a benign identity for Israel that has never corresponded with its ruthless settler-colonial reality.      

The awful truth is that it has taken the death of over 34,000 Palestinians for many in the United States and the world to say “Free Palestine.”  The mainstreamed Israeli “good guy” narrative that has colonized the U.S. body politic for so long is being whittled away by the horrific images of daily genocide and ecocide from Gaza.    

A country does not become cruel overnight.  It takes intent, years of practice and strategies to effectively hide the cruelty.  Since it declared itself a state in 1948, the occupied territories known as Israel has relied on an elaborate state-run public relations industry to convince Western audiences, particularly Americans, of its bravery and noble intentions.

For over six months, Israel’s brutality has been brought into the living rooms of America.  Until then, Israel had made certain that its foundational myths and beacon of democracy tale dominated American politics and government, religion, journalism, academia, cinema and television.   

Those who have been successfully gaslit, whether consciously or unconsciously, and who wish to maintain existing power structures continue to deny the genocide being live-streamed before their eyes, and have galvanized to crush those opposed to Israel’s war on Palestinians.  

American Politics and Government

For decades, Israel has manipulated U.S. politicians emotionally and financially to advance its expansionist ambitions.  Israeli lobby groups, like the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), have poured billions into the coffers of receptive politicians.  

Pro-Israel spending has fueled Congresss overwhelming support for the apartheid regime.  Rarely, if ever, do they question why aid is being given to the fourteenth richest (per capita) country in the world.  From 1990 to 2024, for example, the “I am a Zionist,” president, Joe Biden has received$5,736,701 from pro-Israel lobbies.  

In 2024, AIPAC plans to spend $100 million in an effort to unseat progressive members of Congress (eight in number) who have been critical of Israeli policy and who have called for a ceasefire in Gaza.  

In January 2024, The Guardian newspaper published its analysis of campaign data.  It found that congressional members supportive of the war received the most money from Israel lobby groups.  It also revealed that 82 percent of its members support Israel; 9 percent are supportive of Palestine; and 8 percent were equally supportive of both.  

Religion

Israel’s leaders have also capitalized on the powerful force of religion to whitewash their settler-colonial project. They have exploited the ideology of biblical chosenness and divinely sanctioned land ownership to legitimize land theft, to dispossess the Palestinians and to sell its genocidal war on Gaza.    

An Israeli Democracy Index, 2013 survey revealed that two-thirds (64.3 percent) of Israeli Jews consider Jews to be the “chosen people.”  The prominence of this belief has resulted in attitudes and government policies of exclusion, entitlement and ethnic chauvinism.  

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war rhetoric has been suffused with violent biblical references.  He has cynically ascribed the term Amalek—the staunch enemy of biblical Israelites—to Palestinians.  The far-right in Israel has, for a long while, used such references to justify killing Palestinians.

The Evangelical right has stood solidly with Israel; even more so during its war on Gaza.  The Israel, Zionist lobby and Christian Zionist (religious right) alliance have had enormous influence over U.S. Middle East policy.  For every one Jewish Zionist, there are 30 Christian Zionists.   Netanyahu has courted Evangelicals cognizant of the power they exert within Congress.  

Christian Zionism demands of its followers absolute support for Israel, believing that the Rapture and Second Coming of Christ require the gathering of all Jews in Israel, and that supporting Israel will bring God’s blessing on them and on their nation.   

Many American evangelicals, have been cheering Israel’s war on Gaza, believing it to be a prelude to the end times prophecy.  

Christian Zionists have found powerful allies in the White House and in the U.S. Congress.  In the Trump White House, for example, evangelicals held seats of power with the likes of former Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. 

There are at least 100  evangelicals currently serving in Congress, including the Republican Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson.   It has become almost mandatory for members to attend AIPAC and Christian evangelical events, as well as excursions to Israel to assure the apartheid leaders of their continued loyalty.  

Journalism

American public opinion has been molded to look with favor on Israel. Mainstream journalism has become largely a stenography service for U.S.-Israeli interests.  Most of the pundits and so-called experts on television, for example, come from think tanks funded by pro-Israel groups: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, American Enterprise Institute, Foreign Policy Research Institute, The Heritage Foundation and Council on Foreign Relations.  

Intellectually honest analysis or criticism of Israel is met with orchestrated pressure from Jewish lobby groups or with the dreaded label of antisemitism. Such tactics have been used to create a climate of intimidation, which has often led to self-censorship.

It is useful to look at a few examples to understand how alternative narratives regarding Palestine have been discouraged for decades.  

Ariel Sharon, former Israeli defense minister, filed a libel suit after Time magazine ran a cover story in 1983 accusing him of encouraging the massacre of Palestinians at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon in September 1982.  In 1984, Americans for a Safe Israel filed a petition requesting that NBC’s license be revoked over its reporting of Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon.  CBS faced similar criticism for airing veteran reporter, Bob Simon’s “60-Minutes” report about Christians living under Israeli occupation.  A full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal excoriating Simon appeared soon after.  

CNN’s founder, Ted Turner, caused an uproar when he told the Guardian in 2002 that Israel was engaging in terrorism against the Palestinians, resulting in threats to the networks revenue.  Walter Isaacson, then CNN Chair, appeared on Israeli television to denounce Turner and the network’s chief news executive, Eason Jordan, flew to Israel to appease the regime.    

Magazines such as The New Republic, The Atlantic and Commentary have also been influential in creating an Israel-centric worldview.  Pro-Israel syndicated columnists Thomas Friedman, Bret Stephens, George Will and David Brooks—whose son has served in the Israeli army—dominate the op-ed pages of major newspapers.

Since the October assault, a number of journalists have faced censorship, retaliation or dismissal for presenting the Palestinian narrative or for criticizing Israeli violence.  The firing in October of Michael Eisen, editor of eLife, a prominent academic science journal, after he retweeted an article from the satirical Onion titled, “Dying Gaza’s Crticized for Not Using Last Words to Condemn Hamas,”reflects how censorship has reached into all media platforms. 

All foreign news organizations operating in Israel are subject to Israeli military censors. To suppress the horrors coming from Gaza, Israel has refused to permit foreign journalists independent access to that beleaguered Strip.  Only Palestinian reporters already there have been able to report; for that, they and their families have been targeted.  According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, as of 25 April, at least 97 journalists and media staff have been killed and 16 injured since the war began. 

Academia

For over two hundred days, Israel’s supporters have been straining to preserve their stranglehold over American universities.  They are aware that people are losing their fear of Israel’s watchdogs like Canary Mission, Stand With Us and Hillel; groups that have made it their mission to suppress critical discussion around Israel on college campuses.  

Academic freedom has been denied professors who have bravely challenged  accepted Israeli renderings.  Professors Rabab Abdulhadi, California State University, San Francisco, Steven Salaita, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Norman Finkelstein, De Paul are among the academics who have been intimidated or terminated.     

Pro-Israel forces have stepped up their pressure on administrators, as demonstrations on university campuses have grown.   Wealthy donors have used threats to withhold, or have withheld, donations if speech critical of Israel is allowed.  Administrators have responded, dismissing professors, setting limits on free speech, conflating protests with antisemitism and using police to breakup demonstrations.  More than 100 Columbia University students were arrested on 18 April after the university called in the New York Police Department to clear a protest encampment. 

Students reported being  sprayed with a putrid smelling chemical agent at a Columbia demonstration.  They later learned that they were sprayed with a chemical called “skunk;” an agent developed by Israel and that has been used for years by the Israeli military against Palestinians in occupied Palestine. 

Earlier in April, the University of Southern California, citing unspecified security concerns, cancelled plans for a graduation speech by this year’s valedictorian, Asna Tabassum, a Muslim student.  Disappointed,  Tabassum said the school had succumbed “to a campaign of hate meant to silence my voice.”

Pro-Israel groups have also looked to Congress to neutralize the growing pro-Palestinian protests.  House Republicans have held hearings to “investigate” antisemitism at America’s prestigious universities.  Thus far, the presidents of Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania have resigned following their appearances.   And on 24 April, Speaker Johnson called for the president of Columbia University, Nemat Minouche Shafik, to step down.  

Safety and antisemitism have been used as weapons to silence campus criticism of Israel.  In November, after Jewish students complained of feeling unsafe upon hearing remarks critical of Israel,  Columbia banned its chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace. 

The intensity of Israeli indoctrination is reflected in the reaction of some Jewish students who believe that protests targeting Israel constitute personal attacks on them as Jews.   

Many young American Jews have been raised with the idealized image of Israel as a righteous state, necessary for Jewish safety.  A large number have made the free ten-day trip to Israel sponsored by Birthright Israel, an organization supported by the Israeli regime and wealthy philanthropists like the late Sheldon Adelson.  Birthright, founded in 1999, has played a large role in shaping loyalty to Israel.  Predictably, the reality of the occupation has never been a part of the group’s tour.  

Cinema and Television

Israel loyalists have masterfully utilized the media to shape public perceptions and attitudes.  Movie and television screens have been filled with an abundance of positive, sympathetic images of Israel that have shaped public perceptions.     

Undoubtedly, the 1960 film, Exodus, firmly implanted the heroic image of Israel in the minds of many Americans.  The heroism of the Palestinian people fighting to preserve their homeland from Israeli domination has yet to hit the big screen.     

Beginning with the 1921silent film classic, The Sheik, filmmakers have cast Middle Easterners, Arabs and Muslims as exotic, uncultured, idiotic, lecherous and violent, indistinguishable from one another. 

Although racist depictions of Arabs is not new to the film and television industry, media providers Showtime, Netflix and HBO have amped up the propaganda with series such as Homeland, Fauda (meaning chaos in Arabic), The Messiah, The Spy, and Our Boys.  These dramas, from which many Americans draw their information, portray Israel’s secret police as virtuous defenders of law, hunting down threatening Arab “terrorists.”

Caricatures and negative cinematic imagery have contributed to the destructive dehumanization of Arabs, as witnessed today in Gaza.   The powerful political narrative created around Arabs has allowed Israel’s genocide of Palestinians to become an image on a screen or just another news event. 

For more than eight decades—from photoplay sheik movies of the 1920s to the elaborately produced films of the present—Hollywood filmmakers have perpetuated Middle Eastern stereotypes that have cultivated prejudice and division between peoples and nations.  These stereotypes have created a pattern of socialization that has made the Middle Eastern world distant and vulnerable to attack. 

Conclusion

Although the pro-Israel camp and their allies continue to dominate and influence Congress and the executive branch, they have slowly begun to lose control of the narrative.   

President Joe Biden, however, remains dedicated to the Israeli fantasy.  He has embraced and subsidized a racist supremacist Israeli regime; a 57-year apartheid occupation; squatter colonialism and genocide in Gaza. 

While professing commitment to achieving a Palestinian state, the United States alone vetoed a 18 April Security Council resolution that would have allowed full United Nations membership for the state of Palestine.  And while Israel continues its intense bombing in Gaza, Biden signed legislation on 24 April allocating another $26.4 billion for Tel Aviv to continue its atrocities. 

Israeli gaslighting has reached into and exerted influence in almost every segment of American society.  Consequently, Israel has grown into an entity unbound by borders, exempt from international law and able to commit genocide with impunity.  The horrific images coming from Gaza are, however, are making it increasingly difficult for Israel and its U.S. allies to silence dissent and to continue gaslighting the American public.