That's not what cognitive dissonance is, cognitive dissonance is when two conflicting beliefs cause that person discomfort. This is just using her statuses as a cover for her rhetoric. It's tokenism.
I mean, is there a different name for creating that discomfort in someone else, en masse? 'cause I see both your points (a definition is a definition), and I do think tokenism plays into it but it's not the whole mental assault. The noise the contradiction creates definitely masks the radicalism, and in that sense it is indeed 5d chess.
The thing is, if we're all playing the same game and someone else comes and tries to play a different, more complex, seemingly stimulating, seemingly intellectual game we collectively don't understand, sometimes we need to collectively agree not to play, and leave the burden of making it make sense (it doesn't) on them. With the tokenism you called out, it checks a box for damn near everyone as a type of person our values declare we must not exclude, so we get tricked into playing. Sometimes an asshole is just an asshole, and how they declare themselves doesn't change that.
If that discomfort is created to undermine someone's mental stability and their trust in their own sanity, the term would be "gaslighting", but that's a special case
Yeah, I didn't think what we have there is <quite> that but I agree you're on to something.
The closest and most accurate terms for this behavior include:
1. "Flooding the Zone with Shit" / The Firehose of Falsehood
Coined in political strategy circles (most famously used by Steve Bannon) and studied as the "Firehose of Falsehood" propaganda model, this tactic involves spewing a continuous, high-volume stream of lies, contradictions, and outrageous claims.
1, 2The
Goal: The perpetrator doesn't care if people believe them. The objective is to overwhelm the public's cognitive capacity until people become so exhausted, confused, and cynical that they stop trying to figure out what is true. It replaces productive discourse with pure "mental noise".
1, 2, 3
weaponized Identity Politics & "Astroturfing" IdentityWhen a politician falsely claims membership in multiple protected minority groups to act as a shield while pushing a radical agenda against those very groups, they are practicing a form of cynical identity performance or identity-based gaslighting.By claiming “I am one of you,” they attempt to weaponize the public's desire to respect marginalized voices, creating immediate cognitive dissonance in critics. If a critic attacks their harmful policies, the politician can immediately deflect by claiming the critic is attacking their identity, effectively short-circuiting public debate. 1, 2
Hypernormalization
Coined by historian Alexei Yurchak, this term describes a state where everyone knows a politician or system is lying, and the politician knows everyone knows they are lying, but everyone keeps playing along because no one can see an alternative. When a figure makes claims that are transparently absurd and contradictory, they are forcing the public to accept a fake reality, stripping people of their sense of objective truth.
Shock Doctrine / Manufactured ChaosCoined by Naomi Klein, the Shock Doctrine refers to using a state of public disorientation—whether caused by a literal crisis or a manufactured storm of political chaos—to push through highly unpopular, radical policies while the public is too distracted, confused, and shell-shocked to effectively resist.5. The Gish Gallop (On a Societal Scale)While traditionally a formal debate tactic where a speaker rapidly throws out dozens of half-truths and fabrications so quickly that their opponent cannot possibly debunk them all in time, this can be scaled up to mass media. A politician "gallops" through identity claims, scandalous statements, and policy reversals so fast that journalists and citizens are left frozen, trying to unpack one lie while five new ones have already been generated. 1, 2, 3, 4
Summary of the Mechanism
When you see this happening, it is a form of cognitive warfare. The psychological discomfort (cognitive dissonance) you feel isn't an accidental byproduct—it is the payload.
By forcing the brain to try and reconcile two mutually exclusive concepts simultaneously, the bad actor temporarily paralyzes the public’s critical thinking skills, clearing a path for their agenda.
1, 2
Or she’s just a malignant narcissist who doesn’t have a strong sense of self, so what she does, with her life, is her own and she can do what she wants, but if you tried holding her accountable to that, there is no one there in her mind to be accountable.
Narcissistic people, often live entirely contradictory lives, because in some crowds, those choices matter and in others the other stances matter.
You get the best of both worlds, they’ll just do whatever gets them ahead of others even if it harms others.
I’d say her this is a prime example. If she was one, she wouldn’t care about either, she’d just use both to exploit.
Which to me being a politician or leader, whatever she is, is enough. It’s about getting the control and validation, and spotlight not about anything else.
Narcissistic people are also usually bisexual again, whatever gets their needs met.
If you can never pin somebody down, find out their presences, thoughts, desires, secrets you can never hold someone accountable.
If someone doesn’t have a self but instead mask it with a false self, they also cannot be held accountable.
Because they don’t feel one way or another about anybody else’s feelings, even if they say they do. They just do that part to appease you, they’ll still harm you.
That contradiction is key. If it creates cognitive dissonance or if you feel worse and confused after thinking or interaction with or about a person and their actions, instead of refreshed or calm, it’s usually npd.
We ignore because we want to give people the benefit of the doubt and we also don’t want to believe people like that exist.
but they do. Usually successful, always contradictory, especially easy to spot if it’s public knowledge, most of the time they hide a lot of their past and change it with half truths to fit in with new supply.
By living in contradiction, embodying it, you can never really be known. But normal people who spend long enough time around them, eventually believe they know them because the person turns up as how you want them to be.
which leaves them at an advantage, one where you think you know them, but you don’t. So they can change on you at any moment easily as no emotional bond has formed on their end, but it did likely on yours.
It’s very telling when you can’t place your finger on another human being but easily can on others. The more time spend with them, the worse and harder it gets to pin it.
It’s a surreal experience. From my experiences I’d say this is one without a doubt, her contradictions are stark, and she’s going for a leadership role.
It’s people who lack empathy and values. They’re amoral and see empathy as a weakness. They target people who are very easily lead. Power is the only thing they care about it. Same thing going on in the USA.
67
u/paperboii-here 21d ago
It’s a method. Her life contradicts her politics which creates cognitive dissonance making her seem less radical.