The claim Haitian workers are stealing and eating their neighbors’ dogs and cats in Ohio has troubled me. In the big scheme of national politics, how can such an issue become a focal point? The story itself seems traceable to a woman who could not find her cat and speculated on Facebook that Haitian neighbors may have taken it. She later found the cat in her basement. Ok, just a naive woman who has accepted racist stereotypes coming to the wrong conclusion and feeling a need to share her biases online. How did the claim get beyond the attention of whomever her followers might be?
Somehow, a candidate for the Presidency is told of this story and decides to repeat the story during a debate broadcast to the entire country. The moderator of the debate is also aware of the story and attempts to correct the ex-President explaining that the story was not true. The Governor, the mayor, and the police chief, Republicans among them, deny the claims are true. However, the damage was done among the true believers. Trump’s VP also from Ohio picks up the theme and continues to promote the story. Soon, new observations are reporting ducks or geese have also been stolen. Community members begin to appear claiming the many problems caused by the Haitians.
So, it appears it was a false alarm turned into a national incident. What if it were true? What if instead, the Voodoo Catholics of New Orleans had sacrificed a chicken as part of a religious ceremony? What if individuals following ancient biblical accounts sacrificed an animal? Would there be national outrage targeting an ethnic group? Maybe it was the claim that animals had been stolen from neighbors instead of being purchased or raised. Maybe it was the thought someone would eat a cat. I know – that is weird. Dogs are eaten in places, but cats? A cat makes the story more appalling.
How did it come to this? Some of this might be attributed to confirmation bias. People demonstrate confirmation bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. I suppose we all fall prey, but we all do not have the audience of a contender for the Presidency. Republicans primed with complaints about border insecurity seek and believe claims about those from other countries in the U.S. It does not matter that the Haitians are documented and not illegal and were invited to address worker shortages. A similar issue is involved in attempts to highlight every serious crime committed by undocumented individuals despite the data clearly showing that the general crime rate among such individuals is lower than that of U.S. citizens. Several biases are exhibited here. Aside from confirmation bias, there is anecdotal reasoning which is using individual cases to argue a point while ignoring the more typical or average case.
All of these human limitations aside, it is more troubling to consider the behavior of a Presidential candidate. Perhaps this is a sign of impulsivity which is a dangerous characteristic in an individual who must make important and consequential decisions. Perhaps this is an indication of egocentrism which permits an individual to ignore the advice of better informed individuals. Trump has demonstrated such characteristics repeatedly, but I am afraid it is something even worse. I think it is a tendency to ignore facts in search of dirt that may sway supporters. Lies, misinformation, propaganda or whatever you want to call it, these false claims are damaging to individuals who have been falsely accused and the related hatred spread is not a trivial matter.