The Psychology of Mob Lynching

  .

  .

  .

September 28, 2015: Mohammed Akhlaq (52), Dadri, Uttar Pradesh.

.

April 1, 2017: Pehlu Khan (55), Alwar, Rajasthan.

.

June 22, 2017: Junaid Khan (15), Ballabhghar district, Haryana.

.

June 8, 2018: Nilotpal Das (29) and Abhijit Nath (30), Karbi Anglong, Assam.

.

July 1, 2018: Dadarao Shankarao Bhosale (36), Bharat Bhosale (45), Bharat Malve (45), Aagnu Srimant Ingole (20) and Raju Bhosale (47), Dhule, Maharashtra.

.

July 13, 2018: Mohammad Azam Usmansab (32), Bidar, Karnataka.

.

.

.

This list of mob lynching cases in our democracy-turning-into-mobocracy has an indefinite start, middle and end. Common justifications cited for such animalistic behavior are cow vigilantism, suspicions of child-lifting, theft and cultural practices.

What is mob lynching?

Mob lynching is when a group of people take the law in their hands to “righteously” punish an offender whom their collective mentality has already deemed to be guilty of committing a crime without looking for actual proof that would support their suspicious beliefs. This punishment comes in the form of thrashing with sticks to pelting with stones to parading the victims naked to ultimately beating them down to death by the bare-hands power of a large-numbered, anonymous vigilante group. This group feels insecure, averted and threatened by skullcaps, caste status, mental health condition or simply the looks of victims who are largely perceived to be out-group members.

Triggering point: The Rumor Mill

In a majority of mob violence cases in 2018, it has been found that rumors of child-lifters being out there to grab your tiny tots off the streets were making rounds of our beloved social media apps before a lynching occurred. What we know yet ignore is that manipulating information in today’s day and age is a pretty easy job. Videos of past unrelated instances with blurred faces and changed time stamp can make a very convincing show of how a random Sharmaji’s daughter from 2 blocks away recently got kidnapped by strange men offering her toffee and stuffing her in the back of an Omni.

Rumors that provide characteristic details (even false ones) and appeal to our deep seated fears are the ones that don’t die easily. For example: we all share the collective anxiety about the safety of our children. Moreover, a negative fictitious tale like that of a theft at nearby shop is bound to have a wider reach than a positive one because evolutionarily it makes sense to spread the word about where danger lies to ensure survival of our in-group. Moreover, we are biased towards readily accepting unverified data that confirms our preexisting biases. Thus, in India where the Hindu-Muslim tiffs are frequent, politically motivated and traceable to the bloody times of partition, it is easy to paint a skullcap bearing trader with cattle to be a cow slaughterer. Also, we need to understand that very often rumors are simply a means of trying to make sense of the world around us. So, even if you’re simply asking others if a particular rumor is true or not, you’re first propagating and then negating it. However, this is simply yet another time that your brain and that of the receiver are hearing the same piece of disputed information and more the number of times you hear the same thing, the more credible it seems to be. Thus, it doesn’t really matter if messages regarding a “dangerous mentally unstable woman” patrolling the streets come from an influential and responsible leader or not. All that matters is that there are enough gullible individuals willing to spread this message as a “heads up”.

Why do myths survive? Because they’ve been around for so long that it is difficult to refute them completely, especially when the image they provoke in our minds is simplistic and easy to imagine. Let’s consider the xopadhora myth prevailing across the Assamese society to prevent children from interacting with dangerous strangers. Xopadhora is always a male, who doesn’t belong to the Assamese community, has long hair, carries a jhola (bag) and kidnaps children. No wonder, the lynched Sikh men whose turbans were thrown off by the raging mob in Kamrup near Guwahati to expose their long hair and outside community status made them candidates fit for being xopadhora.

At the scene: What assembles the mob

When a group of complete strangers descend upon mob lynching victims in a formidable wave, a question that arises in our minds is: What brings them together?

1.  Emotional contagion: When a child in the infirmary cries, all other babies in the ward break out into unrelenting wailing. When a stranger smiles at you from across the street, you automatically smile back, with or without questioning yourself later about why you did so. This tendency to mimic the emotions reflected in the facial expression of our fellow beings is called Emotional Contagion (EC). Evolutionary psychology says that EC was essential to our ancestors especially at a time when

language didn’t exist to communicate pain, fear and disgust brought about by the presence of a predator.

Thus, when you see a bunch of people gathered in a tense and aggressive stance, the negative vibe literally catches up to you, putting you in a similar state of mind, thereby, making you willing to join their uninformed charade. Research shows that a 5% minority sway the direction of action of the remaining 95% people in a crowd. This is how a small group that was brought together initially to test a rumor turns into an emotionally charged mob of 30-40 unrelated individuals.

2.  Herd mentality and Groupthink: As mentioned in my article on Bystanders Effect, we find security in numbers. So if a large number of people are engaged in lynching a suspicious individual, it automatically seems like the right thing to do even if on a personal level you’re a very calm person. This is called herd mentality. In a group, it is difficult to know who opened the attack and who made the killing strike. Thus, herd mentality essentially ropes us in through the process of deindividuation whereby individuals who join the herd lose their self-awareness and individuality as they become an anonymous body part of the large group that is almost like an organism with a mind of its own. Herd mentality is then sustained through the process of groupthink. In a mass that is bound by the thread of shared emotions, groupthink ensures that all members support group decision strongly and reject any contrary information (such as the begging pleas of the victims) that may cast a doubt on their decision.

3.  Managing cognitive dissonance: According to psychologist Leon Festinger, cognitive dissonance is a situation where there is an unpleasant disharmony between our thoughts and actions. Once the high of shared emotion drains, rationality and guilt catches up the members of a lynch mob. However, by then it is too late to reverse the done deed. Thus, to remedy their mental discomfort, these members often try to change the way in which they perceive their actions (e.g. they may see their vigilante actions as a necessary evil to keep prospective criminals in line). In a way, then you’re normalizing dehumanization thereby paving way for the repetition of same in future.

4.  News processing at an unconscious level:  People do both what is socially approved (i.e. follow injunctive norms) as well as what is popular (i.e. descriptive norms). Time and again, instruments of news transmission provide statistics for mob violence and other crimes to point out how regrettably often they occur. However, at an unconscious level, our mind confuses such information as being approved because it is popular. This is highlighted in Robert Cialdini’s research work, where he says:

Although these claims may be both true and well intentioned...Within the statement “Many people are doing this undesirable thing” lurks the powerful and undercutting normative message “Many people are doing this.”

“United we stand, Divided we fall.” Never thought that this unity could have a negative connotation too? It is indeed time to reexamine our collective mentality.