Deadly Rumors: Lynching, Hearsay, and Hierarchies of Credibility in Mexico

Abstract

This article examines the role of rumors in the collectivization of violence in twentieth-century Mexico. By focusing on a series of cases of lynching driven by rumors of child theft and the stealing of children’s bodily fluids and organs, the article reveals the hierarchies of credibility that make rumors an effective tool to trigger and escalate violence. The article’s main argument is that rumors become deadly or “weaponized” in the form of lynchings in contexts where anxieties and fears regarding processes of modernization and economic exploitation intersect with citizens’ perception of the state as unable or unwilling to provide security and justice. In twentieth-century Mexico, what made rumors vectors of lethal violence was not only a context of collective fear and economic uncertainty, but also their credibility vis-à-vis other forms of knowledge. Such credibility was grounded on citizens’ keen sense of distrust in state authorities and on people’s belief that without recourse to lynching, crimes would go unpunished. Adding to the credibility of these rumors was also the lynched victim’s actual or perceived condition as foreign or external to the community where the lynching took place, a condition that made them more likely to be the subject of rumors involving the extraction and exploitation of local resources. Child-theft rumors occupy a central place in Mexico’s contemporary context of insecurity. This article provides a historical reflection on the connections between hearsay, mob violence, and citizens’ long-term experiences of exploitation, state neglect, and impunity.