on gaslighting ourselves into oblivion

Table of Contents

intro

I posted last on dialogue and it’s failure to be a legitimate thing in the modern US of A experience. One big piece of that particular lament was this:

I grew up in church settings being taught that truth matters, that absolute truth is a real thing and that worship, faith and integrity is tied to our ability live truth. Yet what I’m seeing from these circles I’ve known most of my life is a blatant disregard for anything resembling truth in favor of lies. Nowadays I can’t even share a verifiable, proven-beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt fact without being damned to hell or some such nonsense.

Truth is dead. Anecdotal experiences, personal desires and the whims of billionaires reign supreme. That’s what it feels like to me when I attempt to try to engage people in conversation or when I watch a good chunk of the news at least. Anecdotal I know but c’est la vie. What is important: Truth should matter; without it we are doomed from the start.

I want to be clear though what I mean when I talk about truth. That matters as well. There are such a thing as facts, no matter what some white lady in a tiktok video tells you. Facts are things that are verifiable. They are events that happened that we have record of. They are things people actually said. Facts carry a need for evidence that indicate the truthfulness of a fact: it could be a written record, a recording, a dataset or some other indicator of truthfulness.

Truth matters when we speak of science as well. Science and the scientific method are important to understand here. Scientific “facts” are determined by building an expansive dataset of evidence pointing to the reliability of a hypothesis. The evidence of truthfulness is found in the reliability of experiments to produce the same result, time and again. I do use scare quotes around “facts” in the prior sentence because scientists encourage their hypothesis to be continually tested and verified in case new methodology and hypothesis prove old ones wrong something that regularly happens as our understanding of the world deepens and evolves. Consensus matters a lot in science as does being able to prove hypothesis with evidence and not feelings. Does that mean that every scientist is going to agree about every hypothesis? No. If 70, 80, 90 or more percent do, that matters and says that the outliers claims need to be examined critically; the burden of proof and building a body of evidence is up to them - disagreement based on “vibes” or “feelings” doesn’t cut it.

I don’t think I can say it enough: these things matter. Today though so many are willing to throw truth out the window in favor of gaslighting themselves into oblivion. Gaslighting is psychological manipulation through the creation of an alternate version of reality. It might flips facts into lies (and vice versa). It attacks, changes and manipulates memories. It’s destructive to our sense of self when done by others; how much more destructive is in when we become (whether by choice or not) willing participants?

MMR Vaccine Skepticism

I think MMR vaccine skepticism presents an easy example of this move towards gaslighting ourselves. A study released in the Lancet Journal in 1998 linked the vaccine to Autism and a made up intestinal disease. At release it was a hard sell because of a small sample size (12) with some sketchy results and no larger study could replicate it in any way. Which isn’t surprising as the article was (finally) pulled completely in 2010 due to ethical violations¹ and (later) fraud. Of note too was an official retraction by 10 of the 12 authors in 2004 as well.

I want to highlight that “fraud” claim because it matters and shouldn’t be downplayed, ignored or shouted over because of “vibes”. There are several key pieces to it. Let me highlight some of it:

• The lead (now ex) doctor was developing his own alternative vaccine.
• This guy was hired by a lawyer 2 years prior to the study to connect the vaccine to autism so that he could sue the vaccine manufacturer.
• He kept all of the different scientists segmented so that he could manipulate the results.
• The participants were chosen based on their coziness with the aforementioned lawyer.

By the time the study was pulled the damage had been done though. This fraudulent study meant to make the (now ex) doctor and lawyer bank had become a sticking point for people who needed a reason for their child’s autism, for people who were anti-establishment and wanted a reason to distrust “the science” and all of the grifters seizing an opportunity to score a con.

What I See…

As I think of this story and similar examples, a few possibilities emerge. For one, I think we sometimes gaslight ourselves because it’s cathartic. For another, I think we sometimes gaslight ourselves because we just need a cause. A third, more nefarious one isn’t so much about gaslighting ourselves but gaslighting everyone around us for our own gain.

Gaslighting for Catharsis

Gaslighting for catharsis is probably the version of this that I can have the most empathy for. If I take the vaccine example above, it’s understandable that people would want a way to understand their child’s diagnosis. They might want a reason, or someone to blame, or something else - regardless of motive the Lancet journal article provided an answer. Refusing to face the truth and reality of the fraud allowed them to hold on to that.

Gaslighting for Need of a Cause

I think a lot of people just want something to fight for. They might be anti-establishment. They might not like authority. They might just want something to fight for. MMR causing autism would provide something (if it were true). Their cause goes up in flames though if it’s shown to be fraudulent so why would they want to believe all of that? I’m all for a good cause but if you can’t base it in reality it’s not worth chasing after at the expense of others.

Gaslighting for Personal Gain

This is the worst of the three categories, by far. The original (now ex) doctor on the Lancet study is an example. He knew he was manipulating results. He was making 400,000+ pounds from a lawyer. He was trying to bring an alternative product to market. He had no qualms about creating an alternate reality for all of those around him for personal gain.

so…then what?

All of those reasons become interconnected and feed off of each other. The grifters market and drum up support amongst those that meet the target market, either among crusaders or those searching for answers to questions that might not have them. They might convince a few unattached to any of those reasons join up just because it sounds plausible. For the grifters this then opens up an amazing opportunity: they’ve already got folks on the hook for one lie, making the next lie all the easier. The cycle repeats with something new (schools providing litter boxes for Furry students or immigrants barbecuing pets) and more and more people join up, further disconnecting themselves from reality - gaslighting themselves into oblivion - making the concept of truth go ”poof”.

Countering the Lies

What I know:

• We have to be unafraid to speak the truth about grifters, frauds and cheats straight up. The emperor needs to be clearly shown to have no clothes. In the UK, the Lancet Journal retracting the 1998 article, a journalist pursuing the story of the lead researching, and the board of medicine revoking the lead doctors license helped stabilize the vaccine rates.
• We need to be able to point to factual evidence regardless of what people think about it. Will everyone buy it? If they are being gaslit (or doing it to themselves) they may not be interested but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try if the opportunity arises.
• This kind of sucks to say but branding and marketing really does matter. One of the reasons lies and falsehoods take hold is that the liars and grifters now how to make them look attractive. I’m reminded of Leslie Knope dealing with fluoride disinformation in Parks and Recreation. They ended up coming up with “H2Flo” to make it sound good to the people and counter the lies. Hard scientific facts, dry economic formulas or similar won’t do it anymore because of all the distrust sown towards professionals.

This is where I’m at in this moment. What about you? What suggestions would you add (or takeaway)? I’m increasingly convinced the only way forward is together so I’m genuinely interested to know.