Gaslighting the Public With the “Mandela Effect”
by One Revelator
May 29, 2016
I have noticed a recent spike in interest over the “Mandela Effect” on the internet via blogs and YouTube. And I must admit that, at first glance, the arguments are quite convincing.
The premise is that CERN has somehow opened portals and has changed our reality in subtle ways. Evidence of this includes changes in older movies and television shows, changes in corporate logos, and even changes in the text of Bibles. This has a disconcerting effect for the reader or listener.
First of all, I'm reminded that we are currently in a state of propaganda coming from corporate, controlled media.
Secondly, I'm also reminded of a statement from the military years ago that said that they were “going to fight the net”. Because of this, an industry of paid online shills has clearly cropped up, particularly in a flailing economy. Some have even blogged about their prior employment.
Thirdly, I'm reminded of when YouTube was bought out for a hefty sum years ago and when Google decided to go ahead and be evil.
With all this in mind, I looked into the detailed claims, or evidence of the Mandela effect. Almost all claims involved a very small change between what people remember and what we see, typically in a Google search. The change would be something minor, like substituting “a” for “the” in a title. Or it would be removing or adding a letter from/to an established brand name. Or slightly changing the logo.
The effect is to get the reader/listener to question whether that is how it has always been. And this is an important response.
When studying propaganda, there are only two goals – agitation and pacification. This is commonly achieved via introducing fear, uncertainty, or doubt into the audience's mind. In this case, the focus is on uncertainty.
So here's what I'm finding. Is it really CERN? Or is it something else?
I'm seeing certain things that haven't changed at all. Yet there will be a casual claim that it used to be different. The most patently absurd examples of this are YT videos claiming that all stoplights used to have the green light on top followed by the yellow with the red light on the bottom.
Other things exploit common misquotes or conceptions. An example of this are biblical references that have been popularly repeated within religious circles, but are not exactly what was written.
Movie clips may have actually changed through the use of Hollywood magic and Google results are easily manipulated by......Google with the cooperation of certain major corporations.
So the final question is why? What is this about? What is the goal? For that, I found a pretty good article on the purpose of gaslighting.
Gaslighting as a Manipulation Tactic: What It Is, Who Does It, And Why
Dr George Simon, PhD
November 8, 2011
Gaslighting is a sophisticated manipulation tactic which certain types of personalities use to create doubt in the minds of others. Here’s how it works and what to watch out for.
In a stage play and suspense thriller from the 1930s entitled “Gas Light,” a conniving husband tries to make the wife he wishes to get rid of think she is losing her mind by making subtle changes in her environment, including slowly and steadily dimming the flame on a gas lamp. In recent years, the term “gaslighting” has come to be applied to attempts by certain kinds of personalities, especially psychopaths — who are among the personalities most adept at sophisticated tactics of manipulation — to create so much doubt in the minds of their targets of exploitation that the victim no longer trusts their own judgment about things and buys into the assertions of the manipulator, thus coming under their power and control.
Effective gaslighting can be accomplished in several different ways. Sometimes, a person can assert something with such an apparent intensity of conviction that the other person begins to doubt their own perspective. Other times, vigorous and unwavering denial coupled with a display of righteous indignation can accomplish the same task. Bringing up historical facts that seem largely accurate but contain minute, hard-to-prove distortions and using them to “prove” the correctness of one’s position is another method. Gaslighting is particularly effective when coupled with other tactics such as shaming and guilting. Anything that aids in getting another person to doubt their judgment and back down will work.
Gaslighting is just one of the many weapons in the arsenal of personalities hell-bent on having their way, even if it means doing so by subtle and covert means of conning others. One of the most important points I make in all my articles, books, and other writings about the narcissistic and most especially, the aggressive personalities, is that they will do whatever it takes to secure and maintain a position of advantage over others. And some of the most effective means at their disposal are tactics that conceal their malevolent intent while simultaneously prompting their “target” to accede to their desires. I outline the most common ones covertly aggressive folks use to manipulate others in my book In Sheep’s Clothing [Amazon-US | Amazon-UK]. But it would be virtually impossible to fully list all of the various tactics expert manipulators use.
Deception is often the key ingredient in manipulation. Deception can be accomplished by outright denial, distortion of key aspects of events, and a variety of other methods, especially the more sophisticated lying techniques. And, as I have mentioned in a prior post (see “Lying: The Ultimate Manipulation Tactic”), a really accomplished liar can deceive another person by merely reciting a litany of absolutely true things — while deliberately and cleverly leaving out one or two crucial elements that would change the entire character of what they’re trying to make you believe.
So, this is a favored technique of “character-disturbed” individuals at are attracted to positions of power and authority. Sound like anyone we know?
I believe this to be more of a fitting possibility that CERN changing the fabric of reality.
My motive for writing this so you, reader, don't end up like this guy: