Fear and Hatred

A few years ago, I read a book called In the Devil’s Snare by Mary Beth Norton.  It’s about the Salem witch panic of 1692 and the author argues that the trials, convictions, and executions of accused witches had more to do with local and regional politics than with anything else.  Over the years, many people have developed theories as to why so many people in the Salem area were accused of witchcraft.  Given that all but one of the accusers were female, and the extremely restricted roles women could play in Salem society at the time, many have speculated that this was an attempt on the part of these women to take some control and get some attention.  Mary Beth Norton does not disagree with that, but she then wonders why the local leaders were so quick to act on the accusations, when the testimony of women was usually given very little weight, and why they reacted so strongly.  Why, for example, did they stick to the belief that a young servant-woman had been tormented by a witch, even after her own employer (a man) testified that she was lying?  Why weren’t they suspicious when, during the interrogation of an accused witch who was vehemently denying the accusations against her, the accuser suddenly became unable to speak?  Her answer is that the leaders had experienced so many military and political failures in the years shortly before 1692 that they saw the witchcraft accusations as an opportunity to appear powerful and successful and to assuage their guilt. 

My interest in this book, however, wasn’t in the big argument that Norton makes; rather, I was taken by the details of the story.  Relations with the Wabanakis, the local native people, were strained because of the First and Second Indian Wars.  There were periodic truces, sometimes initiated by the Wabanakis because they had become dependent on trading with the settlers for cloth, liquor, and corn.  During the hostilities, however, the atrocities committed by the Wabanakis had never been seen before by the settlers.  Entire settlements were wiped out during the wars and non-military families were butchered in their homes.   The survivors were shocked and what they experienced fed the region’s growing hatred of the Indians.  The hatred, obviously, ran both ways and the Wabanakis continued to be angered by the unfair trading practices of the settlers.  Everyone was affected by the wars.  These experiences helped to create the panic that allowed something like the witch trials to occur.  I would describe it as a kind of regional madness in which most of the settlers appeared to be incapable of rational thought.

It’s made me look for similar things that might be happening today.  Obviously, the circumstances today are dramatically different than in 1692, but could it still happen that an entire community (or even worse, a nation) loses the ability to examine, rationally, evidence that contradicts its preconceptions, particularly in a situation with high stakes?   It has happened in modern times in isolated incidents.  The FBI report of the early 1990s about ritual/satanic child abuse allegations and the lack of evidence to support the claims shows that it is still possible for communities to allow their collective fears to overcome the ability to think rationally, especially when religion is involved.  Does this describe, in any way, what's happening now between the Republicans and the Democrats?  Between the Occupy Wall Street groups and CEOs?  Between Republicans and everyone else?