The Twenty-First Century Blood Feud

I have occasionally advocated the revival of some of the values of “the heroic society”. But one of the values of that kind of society which ought not to be revived is the blood feud. This is basically a kind of revenge-cycle in which, when someone commits a criminal offense, the victim or his family responds by committing a similar offense against the offender, or his family. This may seem like justice, but it actually turns the victim into an offender, and the offender into a victim, and prompts both parties to continue inflicting harm upon each other. The result is an escalating spiral of violence. And if the original offense was murder, the blood feud becomes a spiral of retributive killing which can continue for many generations, long after the initial incident is forgotten. Sometimes the payment of a fine (in Irish, an “eric”; in Anglo-Saxon, a “wer-gild”) could settle matters. But it took only one hold-out whose pride got the better of him to start the cycle anew.

Think of the Hatfields and the McCoys here.

When Christianity arrived in Ireland and Scotland, it seems that blood-feuds were straining the social fabric at almost every level. Nobody really wanted to be involved in the cycle of violence. But so much tribal and personal pride was at stake, so no one wanted to be the first to step up and say ‘Enough!’. So a Christian missionary from outside the culture, who preached a god of forgiveness and brotherly love, had a receptive audience.

It seems that the situation in pre-Muslim Arabia was similar. Tit-for-tat justice and eye-for-an-eye punishments were exhausting everyone, and locking whole families into inescapable “obligations” to avenge small wrongdoings with bigger ones. So a prophet whose message defined pride as a cardinal sin, and submission to God and to Peace as the solution to that sin, also found a ready and waiting audience

The problem of the blood-feud can be compared to the situation of the painter who paints himself into a corner, or the carpenter who builds something in his workshop that turns out to be too big to fit through his door. It is a prison, but we do not see it as a prison because we built it ourselves. Indeed the prisoner who locks himself in his labyrinth may still think himself free. But it is a situation in which people do what they think is in their interest but end up producing a situation that no one wants. If you know something of the literature of philosophy, think of the Hobbsean Trap, for instance, or the Prisoner’s Dilemma, or the Dialectic of the Master and the Slave.

This situation may seem theoretical and abstract, but there are numerous real-world examples. Gossip comes to mind: where in the Iron-age an alleged wrongdoer was attacked in his body with swords and knives, today an alleged wrongdoer is attacked in his reputation with malicious words and social manipulations.

Consider the person who:

– gossips incessantly and maliciously about someone
– Includes in the gossip descriptions of incidents that may be several years in the past
– Demands that his side of the story be heard, in the interest of “fairness” and “hearing both sides”, but refuses to hear any view but his own, and may even take steps to prevent other views from being heard
– Recruits others to gossip maliciously about that person
– Makes threats against that person, or describes how he might be irrationally aggrieved if he ever meets that person in a public place
– Mixes half-truths, exaggerations, and lies into the stories of what the other person has done; or is otherwise unable to tell the difference between reality and fantasy
– Uses internet social networks or cell-phone text-messaging to harass and bully that person,
– Always portrays the harms he causes that person person as deserved, honourable, and fair
– Gossips maliciously about that person’s friends, associates, family members, and children

The harm caused by this kind of gossip is social and psychological, but it is still a form of blood-feud. It attacks a person’s reputation, social connections, and peace of mind; it can cause physiological responses including sleeplessness, nightmares, headaches, uncontrollable shaking of limbs, unstoppable crying, and other symptoms resembling post-traumatic stress. It can worsen existing psychological problems such as anxiety disorders or clinical depression. It can render people unable to function in their jobs, or unable to adequately parent their children. It has been known to drive people to suicide.

Friends, I believe that there is a profound difference between ordinary gossip and hate-campaigning. The former may be natural and normal, and may sometimes serve a useful social function; the latter is nothing less than the modern-day equivalent of the blood feud. I think that it should stop.

If you know someone whose behaviour can be described by any three of the points that I noted above, there is a very strong likelihood that this person is engaged in a hate campaign. The more of those points you see in someone’s behaviour, the more likely it is that this person is a hate-campaigner.

What can be done about it? The main thing you can do is deny the hate campaign an audience. Don’t participate. Give that person a first hearing, but if you think that person might be hate-campaigning instead of ordinarily gossiping, then say so. If the person says something slanderous or libellous, or threatens harm or death upon someone even in jest, remind them of section 264.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Remember, the hate campaign depends for its success on third parties deciding that they are “not responsible”, or “not wanting to get involved”. I understand this desire to protect oneself. The hate campaigner usually turns against his own friends and allies, if he has reason to believe they are insufficiently supportive. And no one wants to be the hate campaigner’s next target. But if you are witness to someone behaving as a hate campaigner, in the manner I have described above, think twice before stepping back and doing nothing. Someone’s life might be at stake.

And if you are the target of a hate campaign yourself, please try your best to stay strong, and rational, and remember your satyagraha. Nothing feeds a hate campaigner’s need for hate more than an in-kind response. The hate campaigner’s irrationality (and perhaps inhumanity) will eventually show itself, causing his own friends and allies to abandon him. Or the hate-campaigner will eventually be shamed by his own actions into recognizing and acknowledging his own true humanity, and so will heal himself, and oppress others no more. It may be a long time before one of those things happen; perhaps even many years. The hate campaigner may even just find someone else to hate before he eventually discovers he has built himself into a prison. Yet despite the apparent tenacity of the illusions and emotions that feed the hate campaigner’s work, the fact remains that reality, truth, and reason are stronger, and they always gain a hearing.