There are two senses of the word “witch” that only partly and semi-accidentally overlap. One is “agent of misfortune.” The other is roughly “practitioner of folk magic.” The conflation of these two meanings in modern times causes much confusion, so they are worth disentangling./1

“Witch” in the first sense is a term of accusation, inconceivable as a self-identification. “Witch” persecutions can be found in varied cultures around the world. I’m indebted here to EE Evans-Pritchard who says of the Azande of Sudan, “witchcraft explains unfortunate events.”/2

However, when people talk about witchcraft now they tend to think of early modern, mostly Protestant persecutions, which were connected to attempts in that period to stamp out folk magic. But this is only one instance of the social phenomenon of witch hunting, nor its essence./3

When people self-identify as witches today, it’s mainly proof that the range of things that might have made early modern witches suspect are essentially neutralized. In fact, if anything it’s the fanatical intolerance of their persecutors that’s far more stigmatized today./4

The occasion of this thread is a seemingly deleted @ebruenig post where she pointed out that people talking about Salem today on one hand celebrate the witches for being witches but also assume their innocence of the accusations against them. This is not really a contradiction./5

Since we all accept they were innocent of the “agent of misfortune” accusation, which was what mattered, the remainder of their witchiness is simply some quaint folksy practices that no one is threatened by other than perhaps some marginal fanatics./FIN