Salem Witch Trial Essay

Even though the Salem Witch Trials began in Massachusetts in the 1600s, the fear of witches and witchcraft existed long before then. There was a witchcraft craze in Europe, lasting approximately from the 1300s to the end of the 1600s and resulting in the deaths of thousands (Blumberg, 2007). The Salem Witch Trials began in January 1692 when Reverend Samuel Parris’ daughter, Elizabeth, and niece, Abigail, began exhibiting strange behavior. Another girl by the name of Ann Putnam Jr. started exhibiting similar behaviors around the same time. The girls would scream, throw things, utter strange noises, and contort themselves into unnatural positions, and the local doctor blamed the girls’ behavior on the supernatural. Eventually, the girls confessed

It was not until May of 1692 that the first individual was executed. Bridget Bishop, an older woman known for being promiscuous and stirring up gossip, was found guilty of witchcraft and hanged on Gallows Hill (Blumberg, 2007). The Salem Witch Trials finally came to an end in October of that year when William Phips, the governor of Salem, released those accused from jail and prohibited further arrests in response to accusations against his wife. By the end, 20 people had been executed, either by pressing or hanging, and over 200 had been accused. Despite the fact that the Salem Witch Trials occurred over 300 years ago, the same accusatory attitudes and behaviors that fueled those atrocities still persist in the US

What was once considered a tool for accountability is now a tool used to deflect and lay blame where none is warranted. In the same way that Emmanuel Cafferty was fired from his job based on a single snapshot of a moment in time, many of those accused during the Salem Witch Trials were accused on the basis of spectral evidence, meaning the accused came to the victim and harmed them in a dream or vision. There was no solid proof that either instance truly occurred the way it was said to have occurred. Mob mentality and cancel culture serve as a way to deflect time and energy away from tackling more widespread, systemic issues such as racism and sexism. While many thought at the time that canceling Emmanuel was a step in the right direction, canceling him and having him fired from his job for supposedly making a white power symbol did little to nothing to address the ever-present systemic racism in the US. Rather than fixing such issues, cancel culture only serves to reinforce them by deflecting and ensuring that no meaningful contributions or progress are