In the Arena

On Scapegoats

There seems to be some confusion out there–even among anthropologist commentators–about the meaning of scapegoat sacrifice in the ancient world (i.e. before the famous scapegoat passage in Leviticus that is read every Yom Kippur, which effectively changed the meaning of the ritual and made the scapegoat an innocent…goat).

My understanding of this comes from Stanford Professor Rene Girard, author of Violence and the Sacred, a masterful study of the various forms of sacrifice in the ancient world. Dr. Girard told me:

In Greek mythology, the scapegoat is never wrongfully accused. But he is always magical. He has the capacity to relieve the burden of guilt from a society. This seems a basic human impulse. There is a need to consume scapegoats. It is the way that tension is relieved and change takes place.”

As for Imus, his firing was a projection of this society’s guilt about locker-room racist/sexist “humor.” A classic scapegoat, if not by the current definition.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Why Romney Is Dodging the Press

    Joe, the Romney campaign’s control-freakery makes for bad democracy, but I suspect it’s a smart strategy. Consider the way Mitt’s personal approval rating has bounced back over the past several weeks. As the GOP primaries wrapped up, Romney was roughly as unpopular as late-era George W. Bush. Now he’s about even with Barack Obama.

    Since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, Romney’s favorable-unfavorable rating has jumped to 50%-41%, his best ever and in the same neighborhood as Obama’s 52%-46% standing.

    What changed? Well, for one thing, other Republican rivals are no longer attacking Romney. That helps. But it’s not like he’s had a free ride: the Obama camp has picked up where Rick and Newt left off. An alternate explanation would be that Americans are simply seeing less of Romney, and that makes them like him better.

    For Obama, gay marriage stance born of a long evolutionHuffPost Politics

    Crossroads, Super PACs and the Incumbent Advertising Gap

    In a recent piece about the Obama-Romney ad wars, Michael Scherer made the smart point that this election is different from past ones in that the incumbent no longer gets a free hit on his rival during the period immediately following the primary. The reason: super PACs have the cash to cover that gap while the challenger collects enough general election funds to keep pace.

blog comments powered by Disqus