nobody asked me but i also didn't ask to have my tl dominated by this attempted rehabilitation of an alleged abusive cult leader and cults are a special interest of mine after having lived in one and having nearly been captured into an even worse one (there but for the grace of god &c, &c)
there's a lot of people who like to talk in and around scapegoating dynamics without ever understanding rene girard which is dumb. the essential point of girard is that for the type of culture we live in (which is anything larger than a sub-dunbar's number hunter-gatherer tribe), the scapegoat is LOAD BEARING.
which is to say that the scapegoat mechanism functions independently of whether or not the perpetrator is guilty or innocent. some are, some aren't, and it's basically always a mix of the two. the revelation of the gospel accounts of jesus' scapegoating is that yes, the function runs independently of the guilt or innocence of the scapegoat. but the mechanism itself requires the community to be unified in the belief of the scapegoat's guilt.
in fact it is the scapegoat's purported guilt that allows the mechanism to function in discharging the community's guilt onto the reviled one. this collective action unifies a fractured community, what girard calls "unanmity minus one."
we now live in an age where the revelation that the scapegoat may be innocent has led to the conclusion that all scapegoats are innocent and actually unjust victims. this is false. the point is that the mechanism functions without respect to guilt or innocence. it will suppress signals of innocence and magnify signals of guilt.
this is essentially what george's rehabiliation post gets at. brent is not as bad as they say, he says. the way that people are treating him is unfair, he says. he is not the devil he is made out to be. and yet brent is clearly not innocent. he appears quite substantially deserving of the place of shame he has been placed in, but nobody ever completely belongs there, because again, the scapegoat mechanism functions independently of guilt or innocence.
it's the safety valve for a massively dysregulated community, as it is clear that brent was both sucked into, and catalyzed. the community who cast him out is not innocent, either, far from it. but it doesn't matter. he has been selected to bear the guilt. it's not fair. but somebody has to, until we learn a better way, and we clearly have not, yet.
the scapegoat mechanism creates victims, definitionally. we have learned more recently in history that scapegoats are not as guilty as the mechanism requires them to be. but this does not automatically mean that all victims are innocent. sociopaths know this suspicion in good-hearted people by casting themselves as innocent victims.
there are no innocent victims. or guilty ones. just a species who requires them. it's not fair. we do need to learn a better way that doesn't require scapegoats. this is the good part of george's post, the gesturing towards that, with language around epistemics that is insufficient to the moral and spiritual weight of the call.
aside: it's weird that i'm seeing the lines being drawn differently than when chaosprime had his scapegoating moment, which, funny enough, brent was also involved in, much to his chagrin. he was very clearly not innocent, by his own admission. but he had defenders because nobody likes a witch hunt. so it goes.
the moral community on the other side of scapegoating is calling to us. but we're here in samsara, not in the kingdom of the heavens. there are bad actors, but they are made of the communities that cast them out. nobody is innocent. so it goes. let us pray for wisdom.