The Fall and Rise of Human Sacrifice

I'm in the midst of reading Goliath's Curse, telling the stories of the rises and falls of states, empires, and hierarchy, while looking at what may be ahead as elements of our own society come apart. I was struck reading one brief aside about the rise of human sacrifice, which appeared among almost all of the early states around the world, thousands of years ago. Why was human sacrifice so universally associated with increasingly hierarchical societies and the rise of rulers commanding obedience and extracting resources via threat of violence? The author, Luke Kemp, argues that most societies had taboos against murder of others in the society. If the ruler was able to successfully command murders that were exceptional to these taboos and have them accepted by people as legitimate, brought legitimacy and acceptance to their rule and demonstrated their unique power within the society - their unique place atop the hierarchy. The relative value of human lives was demonstrated. Those sacrificed (and all of those like them who could be potential future sacrifices) must be worth very little relative to the worth of the life of the ruler able to command their deaths.

Those who accepted these sacrifices as legitimate rather than taboo became complicit participants in the social reality they communicated, supporters of the social hierarchy based on violent power of which the sacrifices were a microcosm. Priestly classes often were involved as complicit partners, propping up rulers through their participation in sacrificial systems.

Along the way, human sacrifices carried out by priests for kings fell out of favor. But are they really so far gone?

President Trump is by no means the only to use violence and power to terrible ends. However, he seems to take a particular delight in breaking long-standing taboos, standards of political decorum and ethical boundaries on the imagined potential actions an American leader could take. Why? Is he merely an oafish, profane, rude, cruel individual? No, these taboo-violations are far more calculated.

Every time that Trump pushes boundaries, asserting blatant falsehoods, belittling and embarrassing his own staff, diminishing others through ridiculous nicknames, using rhetoric the last century of presidents would not have imagined using, and taking unprecedented unilateral executive action, he puts a test forward. “Will my supporters accept this as legitimate?” “How far will those who oppose me go to do so?” Marco Rubio epitomizes the complicity of accepting and legitimizing the breaking of these taboos. Once making pronouncements of disgust about Trump and pledging opposition, he then takes a prominent role in the administration. He may squirm uncomfortably on the Oval Office couch as Trump embarrasses him yet again and pushes another boundary, but he silently accepts the latest taboo-break, participating in the legitimization of a dictator-in-the-making out of concern for his own future career path. Many others throughout our society have less ability to push back, but forego using what ability they do have under the same calculation.

Now, we have militarized forces in the streets and breaking down doors, rounding people up based on skin color and accent and occupation, tear-gassing children’s parades, pepper-spraying babies, military-jet-buzzing Halloween, taking parents and leaving toddlers in unattended cars in the middle of the street, assaulting peaceful protestors, and detaining not only undocumented people and permanent residents but hundreds of citizens, with their leader Bovino making Nazi salutes and their department head Noem speaking at a podium emblazoned with a slogan promoting collective punishment forbidden under international law and associated with historical fascists.

Human sacrifice is back. These lives are being sacrificed (killed, detained, deported, separated, degraded, assaulted, etc.) so that Trump can demonstrate that he can do so. Strategic rhetoric is employed to select already vulnerable categories and further devalue in the eyes of supporters the lives at stake in advance, and the actions in the street put the question to his base, “Will you accept this too?” Previously taboo actions become legitimate as the base sits silent and complicit. Every step like this takes the base even deeper into idolizing him, as each step accepted increases the cost of reversing course and admitting the wrong of their years of unquestioning support as boundary after boundary is broken. Step by step all checks and balances erode and the weight of the horrors the base is complicit with becomes an ever-heavier chain tying them to their leader.

Will we protest? Will we organize to keep each other safe? Will we use whatever we have to care for and shield those vulnerable at the current stage? Will we reach out to those in our orbits more directly supportive of this regime and let them know they can still turn back? That they will be welcomed back into the beloved community in spite of all they have been complicit with so far, even now?

(P.S. My argument is definitely not that civility in the public square is really the big concern here, but I bring it up only to highlight the broader pattern of Trump’s taboo-violations. Politicians just being nicer to the other side isn't the end or the means to making things right. However, radical love is, love that sacrifices ourselves for our neighbors instead of the other way around, love that tells the truth, and love that welcomes the enemy back into reconciled and healing community when they turn their backs on their idols.)