Well, what is one to say about Trump's public declarations: is he a liar, a bull-shitter, someone who continually "makes thing up?" Is he deluded and psychotic? Well, the main piece of empirical data is that when one looks at his face, he passionately seems to believe what he is saying, no matter how bizarre or absurd his statements are. 

Hitler also was a strong believer in his own statements and ideas. He passionately affirmed his beliefs in his speeches. He had an ideology. There was a consistency between his ideology and what he enacted on the stage of reality. He hated Jews, and he killed them: the proof of the putting is in the eating.

Trump does not seem to have a coherent ideology--apart from his insistence that immigrants are dangerous and must be removed from the United States.

What's more, he has "fans" (what journalists call his "base"), but he doesn't have large numbers of people who passionately agree with everything he says--and are will to die for him.

PART II of the paper is below.

PART I OF THE PAPER MAY BE ACCESSED HERE.

Best regards,

Richard Koenigsberg

The complete paper is here

In George Cukor’s 1944 film Gaslight, Charles Boyer systematically attempts to undermine Ingrid Bergman’s sense of reality and eventually her sense of herself and her sanity, in order to gain control of her and make use of her estate for his personal enrichment.

The ostensive reason for his gaslighting is not very important, but the process as dramatized in the film is vivid and riveting. Boyer’s power over Bergman is founded in his wife’s vulnerability due to the traumatic murder of her aunt, the immediate aftermath of which she witnessed.

Her willingness to engage in a shared fantasy of ideal love, allows Moyer to convert her trust into submission as he craftily suggests certain mental problems she is exhibiting, suggestions which eventually become accusations and finally psychological assaults. Ultimately Bergman’s hold on reality is shattered, and she begins to go mad.

We should note that the type of gaslighting dramatized in Cukor’s film is different from that between Donald Trump and his followers. First off, Trump’s followers are enthusiastic about ceding control to the leader, freely submitting to his manipulations, denials and lies.

In the film, Bergman is terrified by the supposed loss of her tie to reality, Trump’s followers revel in their supposed freedom from facts, and seem liberated and ecstatic. The group psychosis accompanying their merger with the grandiose man fuels their belief in his omniscience and the rightness of his power. They crave submission and experience his gaslighting of them as a merger with that power.

However, despite these differences, the core process in Trumpian gaslighting is the same as in the film. The abuser manipulates the victim into questioning reality, and substitutes a set of alternate truths, e.g. false beliefs (a type of induced cryptopsychosis), and then by means of this newly acquired authority, he or she manipulates the victims vulnerabilities, seeking to control their mood and self-state for the abusers own interests.

In the movie Gaslight, Ingrid Bergman is portrayed as a passive victim who resists Boyer’s manipulations and is terrified as she succumbs to his will. On the other hand, In fact the community of followers, especially during Trump rallies, take part in encouraging and Donald Trump’s victims actively seek out a tie with the grandiose leader in order to share in his fantasies of perfection and power. joining in the repudiation of facts, as they chant and bellow out vengeful insults and slogans.

For example, despite Hilary Clinton’s loss and retirement they still demand that she be “locked up”, and howl in pleasure at the great leaders’ parodies and insults. In this altered state and alternative reality, they believe that they and he will “Make America Great Again”, a reparative fantasy in which shameful self-states and deficits are magically repaired as they and their leader triumph over their enemies.

In many ways Trump’s gaslighting relationship with his followers is similar to that between some, but not all domestic abusers and their partners. In such situations, when this dynamic is applicable, the power of the abuser is maintained and the submission of the abused partner assured by a process of intimidation in which the obvious reality of the abuse, scars, bruises, broken bones, are denied and explained away in other terms, while the abuser assures the abused that he or she is the one at fault for their problems and that the abuser is blameless.

This is the same process that exists between a child who is sexually abused by a parent or adult caregiver. In such a situation, a child may be told that they are the favorite and as such are often treated by the abuser as a favorite. The abuse is never discussed and if ever confronted about it, the abuser looks at the child or young adult as if they are crazy.

In Trump’s case even as he asserts his loyalty to his followers and their way of life, he and his party are actively (even aggressively) pursuing political and economic goals that are in many cases destructive to their health and interests. This lack of empathy in pursuit of his own goals is another example of his cryptopsychosis.

The clearest example of this is his ongoing legal effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act as well as Republican Party’s efforts to limit access to Medicaid and Food Stamps. For example, early on, he attacked the ACA: “When Obamacare kicks in in 2016. Really big league. It is going to be amazingly destructive. Doctors are quitting….It’s a disaster. They had a plan that was good. They have no plan now.” Then several years later he promised: “Obamacare. We’re going to repeal it, we’re going to replace it, get something great. Repeal it, replace it, get something great!”

Despite the fact that many of Trump’s supporters are ACA recipients and others depend on Medicaid and SNAP (Food stamps), his promise to repeal the ACA is met with cheers and unanimous applause. His assertion that a “great” replacement is coming is never realized, nonetheless the deluded claim that he is saving the people from a disaster in order to give them something far better, remains a powerful message which he drives home to the frantic acclaim of his base.

The power of the message, the antidote to shame and the narcissistic disequilibrium, is like heroin to a drug addict who cannot acknowledge the self-harm they are inflicting with the potential loss of the ACA. If anyone were to challenge his assertion (many do) he attacks them as socialists and Democrats in cahoots with the medical and pharmaceutical industries. In his cryptopsychotic world his lies meet the transactional needs of the moment, and when confronted with the truth, he doubles down on them.

Much of Trump’s gaslighting is enacted through social media. He uses Twitter as his personal life line to his followers. The cryptopsychotic messages of delusional lies and false accusations that he himself believes are kept alive with a Twitter feed that is the oxygen that both he and his followers desperately need to continue to assert the illusions and maintain the gaslighting.

The need for this consistent messaging and feeding frenzy is akin to an intravenous infusion, the sometimes minute to minute messaging that Trump uses to ramp up the grandiose delusional echo chamber. We will now touch on several of the specific techniques which Trump uses to gaslight his followers and the American people.