Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group. The term comes from the 1944 film ‘Gaslight’, in which a murderous husband manipulates and confuses his wife by dimming the gas lights in their home and then denying it’s happening.
Anyone is susceptible to gaslighting, and it is a common technique used by abusers, dictators, narcissists, and cult leaders. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn’t realize how much they have been brainwashed. While often seen in personal relationships, gaslighting can also occur in the realm of politics and elections. Gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse that leads the target to question their judgments, reality, and even their own sanity. Psychologists have developed tips for recognizing gaslighting in politics.
In a political context, gaslighting can take many forms, often involving politicians or political groups presenting false information as true or denying factual information to make people doubt their own understanding of reality. This can be accomplished through various means, including spreading disinformation, denying previous statements or actions, blaming others for one’s own mistakes, and dismissing criticism as fake news or conspiracy theories.
A certain amount of truth-twisting is not uncommon in politics; most politicians inflate or bend the truth at times. However, we have never seen the degree of serial lying that we are witnessing today. Political gaslighting is fast becoming the defining feature of our times.
Farah Latif, a communications expert from George Washington University, has stated that political gaslighting employs specific techniques: “It utilizes the deceptive and manipulative use of information to destabilize and disorient public opinion on political issues.”
In reality, this translates to creating false, alternate narratives not based on facts; calling those who question the gaslighter’s narrative irrational or undermining their sanity; and covering up lies to make them sound convincing. Latif adds that political gaslighting becomes a strategy to “garner support for or against an ideology, viewpoint, or policy.” The impact of gaslighting in the political sphere is mass paranoia, confusion, pain, and uncertainty.
Typically, gaslighting is a tactic used by powerful individuals with narcissistic tendencies who seek to manipulate others into submission. But what if this grand vision of control is directed toward an entire nation? According to Latif, there are two distinct victims of political gaslighting: the gaslit (those who are successfully manipulated) and those who hold opposing views (such as journalists and researchers). Political gaslighters may attempt to silence the latter.
This can be a powerful tool for manipulation in politics. By creating confusion and doubt, those who engage in gaslighting can control the narrative, deflect blame, and maintain power. It can also contribute to a polarized and distrustful political climate, where different groups have vastly different perceptions of reality.
Psychologist Bryant Welch has noted that former President Donald Trump regularly used this tactic with the American people, stating, “The very state of confusion they are creating is a political weapon in and of itself. If you make people confused, they are vulnerable. By definition, they don’t know what to do.”
The first controlled and carefully planned instances of political gaslighting were seen in Nazi Germany, where dissidents were toyed with in many ways, including the sending and receiving of fake letters attributed to them. A similar technique—modifying letters on laptops—is believed to have implicated Indian activists. This method is also used to stoke communal fires and overwrite history, leading to alternative narratives about our identity as a people.
Furthermore, the pandemic saw an alarming rise in political gaslighting, with leaders worldwide labeling Covid-19 a “conspiracy,” claiming there was no vaccine shortage when there was, and downplaying the severity of the situation. In India, the government’s claims about the pandemic—pointing to communal issues to divert attention from real causes—are a prime example. If the pandemic has shown us anything about politics, it is that political gaslighting is not just rhetoric; it can be deadly.
Researchers have distinguished between overt and covert political gaslighting. The former occurs when a speaker explicitly peddles demonstrably false information while presumably aware of its falsity. The latter happens when the speaker makes ambiguous statements that cannot be conclusively refuted. Examples of covert political gaslighting include shedding crocodile tears about purported violence during protests or politicizing the pandemic while denouncing the same.
A litmus test for identifying political gaslighting is that the audience always has a reasonable basis to doubt the claims made by the gaslighter. Researcher Alex G. Sinha, in an article in the ‘Buffalo Law Review’, identifies political gaslighting not by the gaslighter’s intentions but by the effects their manipulations have on the public, including triggering doubts about public recollections of “settled matters of historical fact.”
“When confusion, diversion, distraction, and disinformation are ramped up to the point where they become an omnipresent pollutant of public debate, we may end up losing faith in the very possibility of truthful discussion—or in our own views,” wrote Stephan Lewandowsky, a professor of Cognitive Psychology at the University of Bristol, U.K. The subversion of reality and twisting of facts on a mass scale makes it difficult for citizens to agree on what the truth is.
However, it is “gaslighting” that best articulates what the past decade has felt like in India. The BJP-led government’s operation of an informational war machine is evident with its network of WhatsApp groups and an expansive, virulent social media army—the “IT cell”—acting in tandem with pro-government content creators, pliant television media, and advertisements splashed across daily newspapers, billboards, and digital platforms. The party’s information blitzkrieg has unfolded alongside a simultaneous assault on and undermining of democratic institutions, civil society, academic spaces, and whatever little independent media has spoken up.
Days after the Supreme Court held the Electoral Bond scheme unconstitutional and ordered the release of data showing that the BJP amassed crores in donations, the prime minister told the media that the political funding scheme had led to transparency, even as government lawyers defended the opacity of the scheme in court, claiming that citizens had “no fundamental right to know the source of electoral bond funds.” The political gaslighting in India is becoming increasingly virulent.
It has also infiltrated many state elections. The connection between party performance in economic development and state election results has been severed by the increasing political gaslighting and its effects in India, clearly seen in the two Telugu states after the 2023 elections, especially in Telangana State.
By J R Janumpalli