Witch Hunting in the Twenty First Century
The average person in developed countries seems to believe that witch hunting was something done by an older “patriarchal” society to mostly older and often single women in the pre-1700 era. They also believe that people no longer believe in witchcraft- at least not enough to ostracize,torture and burn people who hold beliefs or practice ideologies that are non-mainstream. But is that true?
Did the phenomena of witch hunting really die out after the 1700s?
To answer this question it is necessary to separate the phenomena of witchcraft, and therefore witch-hunting, from the pre-1700 images of witches and sorcerers. While the vast majority of people no longer believe in witches and warlocks who fly on brooms, casts spells and brew magic potions- the same cannot be said of the mental infrastructure that allowed people to believe in that crap in the first place.
Were the anti-communist scares of 1950-era USA really that different from witch-hunts during the dark ages? In both cases sheeple led by priests (cynical oligarchs) spread false information that people who worshiped Satan (communism) had infiltrated into a society of believers in the one true religion (capitalism) to cause mischief and mayhem leading to the faithful questioning the one true religion and its priests. The same is also true of the numerous historical purges in communist countries where heretics and sorcerers who possessed forbidden knowledge (free-thinking intellectuals or dissenters) were made to disappear for causing mischief, doubt and mayhem amongst the ideologically pure and innocent communist sheeple.
Witchcraft is best defined as any non-mainstream ideology which challenges the beliefs of the dominant socio-economic “elite” of that society. This is especially true if most believers in the ‘dangerous’ ideology are previously marginalized members of that society.
The logical inconsistencies inherent in the medieval persecution of suspected witches disappear if you see witchcraft as institutionalized slander, torture and murder. Otherwise why would a poor old hag worshiping a supposedly less powerful deity (satan) pose any threat to richer people who worship the supposedly more powerful deity (the christian god).
Let us now look at some issues in our current era through this filter.
Consider Ephebophilia- middle-aged dudes lusting after sexy teen tarts. There are many in our so-called ‘moral’ society would like to see such ‘evil’ men locked up forever. But why? What is so wrong about men feeling attracted to attention-seeking post-pubescent teenaged girls? Was such attraction ever considered odd or pathological in any previous era of human history or pre-history? So what has changed? Are the teenaged girls who receive such attention disadvantaged by it- anymore than if it came from boys their age? The same women, and their pussy-whipped husbands, who rail against middle-aged men looking at their precious and “innocent” daughters have no qualms about entering them in modeling shoots, talent competitions, pageants, dance competitions or buying sexually provocative clothes for them. It seems that these “concerned” parents are quite happy if their daughters flaunt their blossoming assets before an equally “concerned” society for the ‘right’ amount of money.
Therefore the mortal outrage and witch hunts surrounding ephebophilia have little to do with any real concern about the sexual exploitation of teenage girls and everything to do with ensuring ever-increasing compensation for potential sexual access to them. The “pervy” middle-aged guys just cannot offer enough financial compensation for the promise of tight teenage pussy.
Let us move to the related phenomena where any guy is considered a potential sexual predator unless proven otherwise- even that is rarely enough. Let me ask you one question- What percentage of men would prefer raping a woman or child over consensual sex with a post-pubsecent woman (or man)? The answer is that a vanishingly small percentage of men actually prefer getting their sexual jollies by physically forcing women or children. That is why violent rape or blatant child sexual abuse are so rare- especially if both parties are strangers. The vast majority of violent rapes and sexual abuse of children that do occur are amongst people who have known each other very well. Yet the vast majority of our overt efforts to prevent such incidents focus on the “strange” man around the corner.
Furthermore women always seem to remember episodes of “inappropriate sexual behavior” by their soon-to-be-divorced husbands towards the kids when she is seeking a favorable monetary outcome after the divorce. Isn’t it odd? I mean, if the allegations are true shouldn’t she have said something about it earlier? The rather unpleasant fact that such allegations usually occur in situations where the woman is trying to seek a better monetary compensation or gain more social sympathy or attention make it very similar to young women in the pre-1700s accusing older or unpopular women of witchcraft. In both cases the accuser gained some combination of money, sympathy or status from perjuring against an already marginal person.
What do you think? Comments?