Gaslight – FLNWO #08

by | Sep 17, 2013 | Film, Literature & The New World Order | 30 comments

In this edition of Film, Literature and the New World Order we welcome Thomas Sheridan, author of The Anvil of the Psyche, to discuss Gaslight, the 1940 British psychological thriller that introduced us to the concept of ‘gaslighting.’ In the discussion we point out how common gaslighting is, ask “Are you being gaslighted?”, talk about techniques for defending oneself from gaslighting, and talk about how this technique is used on a societal level by the psychopaths at the top of the pyramid.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

Watch on Archive / BitChute Odysee / Rokfin Rumble / YouTube

Next month: Rudyard Kipling’s Kim – (audiobook)


  1. I can recall doing exactly this kinda of gas lighting behavior to bully a kid back when I was a young teenager. I just moved things around and did simple slight of hand to drive him to the point where he had a freak out and started banging his head on the wall so I decided it was too much external result for my small amount of pleasure so I stopped.
    I can recall how fun it was though, the feeling of getting one over and feeling smarter then someone else- a person with no empathy would probably find it addictive just for the buzz let alone actual gain. THAT may be why you see the gloating, hate filled ‘revelation of the method’ kinda thing where people with power lie and know that their lies are so obvious even an idiot could see it but that ‘YOU’ dont or dont dare say anything about it.
    People have for some reason become weak and think that the world is naturally a fair and nice place and everyone is as nice and docile as them. Wild people were never so stupid as to think their rulers loved them.
    Its funny how Sheriden says that psycopaths lack creativity because I thought the ‘force awakens’ was exactly what a person who had no creativity or understanding of storytelling would THINK a star-wars movie should be like- and to be honest what TV and most movies i have watched these last 10 years has been more like BAD fanfiction of themselves.
    Glad I skipped the last 10 years of TV and music though because honestly I have seen a creepy kind of change in the opinions and attitudes of several people who run the box constantly in the background

  2. Well rounded entertainment and educational presentation. Spending time in these pursuits are rewarding. Much more rewarding than looking at what the TV airwaves offer up. Thank you James for your insight and the content you put forward. Well worth twice the cost of admission.

    TV of the 50s and 60s encapsulated in a song by the Dresden Boomers. ” Bang Bang I shot John Wayne!”

  3. From Truthstream Media’s recent video, “Do People Realize They Are Creating Their Own Overlords?” gaslighting is mentioned in the context of AI from big tech companies committing the gaslighting. See queued video.

    When Google, Amazon, et al., can perfect their gaslighting, they can impose even more control on the public. And when we realize big tech = government/big brother, we are in a bad, bad situation.

    • – BUMP – (link to TruthStreamMedia QUEUED)

  4. I’m glad James posted this September 2013 conversation (Gaslight – FLNWO #08) as a “REVISIT”, in light of recent references to Gaslighting.

    I always find conversations about psychopathic & toxic behaviors fascinating.

    However, I came into this interview with a more narrow definition of “Gaslighting”.
    I had the previous notion that Gaslighting was a specific method that a psychopathic personality-type would utilize to shake another’s observed sense of reality. (i.e. hide things, telling another “That’s not true”….)
    For example:
    The Z.P. Bazant hypothesis of the WTC Tower top crushing all floors below it, when that theory does not even match video footage (reality).

    Well, I guess the DEFINITION of the word, “Gaslight” has a much broader brush stroke, especially in the field of Psychology.
    This interview helped me to grasp that broader definition of the word.
    Now, to me, the word essentially means “psychopathic behavior”.

    This is a Psychology Today article which goes along with the interview and aspects of Gaslighting.
    11 Warning Signs of Gaslighting
    Gaslighting is a manipulation tactic used to gain power. And it works too well.

    • From article:
      Warning signs of Gaslighting:
      1. They tell blatant lies.
      2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.
      3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.
      4. They wear you down over time.
      5. Their actions do not match their words.
      6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.
      7. They know confusion weakens people.
      8. They project. (accusing you of things that they do themselves)
      9. They try to align people against you.
      10. They tell you or others that you are crazy.
      11. They tell you everyone else is a liar.

      Mainstream media and many politicians and many “skeptics”
      check most of these boxes.

      Hillary checks them all.

      • zyxzevn says: “Hillary checks them all.”

        Man, you said it!

  5. The source of Evil is the denial of duality.
    Light is not inherently good and Darkness is not inherently bad. But the denial of one over the other is the source of Evil itself.

    Wow. It’s refreshing to read an honest summation informing and warning how you function in the world. In the protestant swamp where I struggled for so long with such cruel insanity, my search took a few years and led me to a handful of other people who did the mental heavy lifting, dissecting the platonic philosophy of dualism and illustrated how it’s the bedrock of all tyranny, particularly as it is manifested in Calvinism/Protestantism. At last, my experience in “Church” finally made sense.

    One such person has a blog and I think it would be awesome to read an exchange between you and him. He would love it!! Here’s a sample of one of his older posts:

    The problem with metaphysics is that no one seems to be able to get away from duality. No one can figure out how to get a multiplicity of reality from a singularity, even though they may assume and/or assert that their dualism is in fact a singular metaphysical primary. Which is understandable. It’s certainly a complicated paradox to unravel. And on the face of it appears to be wholly contradictory, and this is why I think philosphers and psuedophilosopers didn’t and don’t seem to possess an indefatigable resolve to reconcile it. Because they don’t recognize it as a paradox, but as a contradiction. Of course the irony here is that once you reject a singular metaphysical fundamental as a contradiction, and thus necessarily adopt a dualistic metaphysic (e.g. existence/existing (is and action), darkness/lightness (good/evil), the ying yang of far east philosophies, total existential insufficiency/moral responsibility a la Christianity, the interplay of the infinite and the finite a la Jordan Peterson) contradiction, itself, becomes the fundamental. By conceding that contradiction is not possible, and thus rejecting either implicitly or explicitly a single metaphysical fundamental, contradiction, by virtue of a dualistic premise where contrary notions are fused, becomes everything. Somehow, by some contortion and distortion of logic, mutually exclusive propositions relate to each other and compliment each other. And somehow this passes for the singularity metaphysics demands.

    To be blunt, this is absurd. You don’t get to select opposites like infinity and finity, or lightness and darkness and then magically make them a corollary and then claim to have solved the metaphysical problem. This must be understood: Opposites are not corollaries. They cannot, and never were, and never will be corollaries. They are opposite. Which means that by definition they are not functionally the same thing. Once opposites become “two sides of the same coin”…that is, once opposites become One, then truth is impossible. Because by this logic truth and lie become One; good and evil are One; is and is not are One. And from this there is no limit to the madness and the destruction madness will spawn.

    • I appreciate your grace and diplomacy, Drazen.

      Tough questions, no doubt. Observing nature is one of my favorite past times, and not a day goes by where I don’t entertain a “deep” question or two depending on what I witnessed. It’s interesting to me that within a kind of animal, say chickens, there are unchanging behaviors like the pecking order, exerting dominance over another and it’s just accepted. For example, one hen may find a cricket and begins to carry it away to enjoy it in peace, but this other dominant hen sees it and rushes to steal it away, a chase ensues, and the dominant one wins, takes it and gobbles it up! No hurt feelings, no sense of injustice – it’s just the way things are. Though I love our chickens and dote on the weaker ones, theirs is not a society I would want to live in and thank my lucky stars I wasn’t born one.

      That’s just one example. The insect world is incredibly diverse, beautiful and horrific. From this broad spectrum, I’d have to say that there are “good” creatures and “bad” creatures: the good ones are the pollinators who do no harm to other creatures, but if it does, it’s defensive, like the honey bee (only that one dies when it stings). From the selection of pollinators, I’d have to go with the caterpillar/butterfly as being the ideal creature. It’s independent, no hive mentality. Any “deception” by way of camouflage is merely defensive, to protect its own life from predators. The “bad” kind of insect is the parasite. I have in mind this kind of fly who lays its eggs into the caterpillar, such as the monarch. The monarch caterpillar prematurely leaves the plant and proceeds to the chrysalis stage, where it suffers a slow death of being eaten alive. The parasitic fly’s very existence depends on inflicting harm on another insect.

      As people, I believe mankind is a special creation. Though we may be born into a tribe or family, we are not bound by instinct to remain. Different from the animal kingdom, we can educate ourselves, and ultimately carve out our own new path, and hopefully one that does no harm to others, but is actually beneficial, like pollinators.

      • Your observation about my having a narrow view is somewhat accurate, in that what I shared here was my interpretation of a facet of nature, a sort of visual proverb (“Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, provideth her meat in the summer”).

        Natures role is to not only to promote and sustain Life but to enhance it and make it prosper as well. To make it the best it can be at any give moment. It carries out this role without fear nor favour for any individual element or species within creation. Survival of the fittest, if you like.

        I absolutely agree.

        The mistake I see, however, is carrying over to mankind the same laws of nature such as survival of the fittest, which must naturally manifest a callous outlook, like regarding psychopaths as nature’s tool. Animals are primarily governed by instinct, man by conscience and reason. As much as I dislike the parasitic fly, it truly is “innocent”, not “bad” or “evil”; it simply survives. But mankind lives on a different plane, and I simply can’t make the leap that excuses what I regard as “evil” or “bad” as merely being evolution’s tool to make us better in the long run. True, what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger, but we still expect justice. Why is that?

        • You’ve been incredibly patient and obliging. Thank you, Drazen.

          I’m definitely struggling with something here, but I don’t know what it is. So far, what you’ve said, specifically in your last two replies, makes sense to me. You provide observable examples, contrasting raw nature to man’s modern existence, as well as concrete definitions which assist us in resolving conflict. So far so good.

          Some level of conflict will always be present within Human interaction because it’s the conflict which creates the angst to challenge ourselves for deeper understanding. But this conflict is based more on resolving the conflict within ourselves individually. When inner conflicts go unresolved for an extended period of time they manifest themselves as outer world conflicts.

          I believe the splinter bothering me is in here somewhere. The conflicts I have in mind are human predators fine-tuning their skills on other humans. It’s not the burden of the “victim” to look inwardly and ponder what “corruption” therein lies. Also, where is dualism at play? I’m honestly not seeing it.

        • Well, thanks Drazen, for your directness and honesty by laying it all out. After a day of questioning my sanity and wondering if I was jumping to conclusions, I can exhale and relax, knowing that my instincts were dead on target.

          I read the charter you authored (just curious, who wrote the history?). Potent stuff.

          Organized religions are part of the control mechanism[…]Because once you have made it back, you can never be anyone’s slave.

          I’m with you there!

        • I neglected to respond to you, manbearpig. But I must say, reading how well you isolate and break down difficult ideas, getting to the root of things is like watching a cowboy on a stallion, racing after and corraling wild horses.

    • Drazen-

      I too prefer the word Bad instead of Evil in this context. It irks me whenever Evil is used because it’s just not accurate. That is a word that belongs in religious texts. Just my own opinion.

      Also, good and bad are absolutely nothing more than value judgements that exist in the mind of each individual. “We came, we saw, he died. Hahahaha (HRC)” comes to mind. Good and bad are not organic things that exist in the world.

      I do not wish to offend anyone who believes otherwise about these things. It is just how I see them.

  6. Michael.bc-

    Thanks for the link. Illuminating.

    We make the brain we need in life? Did he actually write that? What a comically absurd thing to say.

    Psychopaths have eclectic musical collections? Well then. I guess I’m a psychopath. Good to know.

  7. “Awareness is the way out/home.”

    Sounds like you’ve been meditating, my friend…

    • Very good points. And I really agree with what you are getting at generally. But I would say that people should consider the word ‘intent’ carefully. According to Merriam Webster, intent is defined as: having the mind, attention, or will concentrated on something or some end or purpose. The great paradox of meditation in my opinion is that when one meditates, they should not be trying to achieve something, or be concentrated on some end or purpose. Instead, they should simply become aware, non-judgmentally, of the world around them, including their thoughts. But the problem is, why are many people drawn to meditation in the first place? Because they have the intent of solving some problem with themselves, or achieving a higher state of being. They have intent. But the state of true meditation can only be achieved with purposelessness, with non-doing, with non-intent.

  8. I understand.
    There is so much to digest.

    I do like it when Corbett reviews some of his past work during interviews. It is a nice rehash of important points.

  9. I was looking around in the archive, and today I listened to this Gaslight episode for the first time. I reckon it is a great episode, and unfortunately it has not become less relevant over the 10 years that have passed since that episode was first published. The episode is also relevant to the recent Dissent into Madness series (

    I started writing this comment as I wanted to add this as a suggestion for a future flashback episode. However, seeing all the comments from 2019 I realised it has been “flashed back” recently (

    Anyhow, another nice episode!

    • Nice to see this important episode “flashed back” once more.

      • Agreed, Frode. If you’ve listened to the episode three times, you must be a pro at spotting gaslighting from a mile away.

        I’m grateful to HRS for providing (a few comments above yours) the link to an article about the warning signs of gaslighting, which zyxzven picked up on by listing all 11 signs for us (thanks, z.). I copied the list to remind myself of what to look for in case I ever encounter an expert gaslighter.

        • Thank you, CQ. Yes, that list is useful. It would make a nice t-shirt. Maybe it would even scare off some “gaslighters”.

  10. Was Thomas Sheridan memory holed? All the links are either full of cobwebs or broken.

  11. Indeed, we should think of those that actually got the Covid shot and gave us shit for not, as Victims. These people got Gaslighted by the Propaganda machine because they would not, or could not, turn it off. I made a point of getting out of the house and taking walks in the Park during those times we were supposed to be locked in our homes. It was amazing how few people were out and about during those times. I hope we never see times like that again.

    I was standing in line at Costco the other day, and got to talking with the women in line behind me (I would not have been able to do that three years ago). I started the conversation noting that the guy in front of me was buying cat Litter. I said, “I adopted a couple of cats after the brother in law of a good friend died one month after getting a Covid Shot, and I don’t think it was a quintessence “. The women said that she had gotten one Covid shot and had a bad reaction to it. To which I said “That should tell you something”. Then she says that she is considering not getting another one, for which I respond “I wouldn’t”. This lady was a victim of the lies and propaganda pushed upon her by the psychopaths, and likely a sitting duck for the ones on the street that Thomas Sheridan tries to expose.

    • You surely got her thinking, TruthSeeker. Maybe she has since done some digging on her own and will refuse all shots from now on.

      I’ve heard of “quintessential” before, but never “quintessence.” I suppose what you’re describing was neither a quintessence nor mere coincidence! 😉

      BTW, thank you for taking care of the cats who were left homeless by that wretched lie.

  12. This was fascinating. I was too tired to comment.

    Top class English footballer Rio Ferdinand on what it was really like in the Man Utd dressing room.

    (Working class) psychologist.

    ‘That kind of behaviour could come across as sociopathic’

    Bullying comes as standard.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member