Arrivals...There goes the neighborhood.

The human characteristics of fear and acceptance are almost tied hand in hand. That being said, it's no surprise to me that there has never been a mere uniform pattern of human acceptance and revile of other. This is true, however, only on a large scale level; the individual human, from my own observations, have much less of a diverse response to social change. Despite the lack of a uniform response, it seems as though  for the most part, humans expel oddities. Ultimately, a degree of knowledge is required for any sort of judgement to be past. When the English colonists landed in northern Columbia, the aborigines had no problem helping them. The Puritans were refugees, fleeing from the persecution of the Church of England, who considered them heterodoxical. Oddly enough, the Church of England was able to begin persecution of it's rivals with mere decades after it's truly bloody inception; the inhabitants of England during that time were, for the most part, members of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and they were very hostile to the Anglicans, who they saw as heterodoxical in worship (another case of heterophobia, or discrimination against a foreign group). The aborigines pitied these people, upon whom God's blessings were truly lacking, and they taught them, and helped them, survive. The same as true for those Englishmen living on the central part of the east coast, in Virginia, save for the fact that these Englishmen were not refugees. Eventually, however, the Anglo-Saxon grew powerful, and when the Indians saw how these arrivals were able to exterminate villages of man, woman, child, infant and canine, they began to fear them. Chief Powhatan, in one instance, displayed to Colonial leaders the scalps of enemies he'd slain, as a warning. Nonetheless, the colony of the virgin queen grew in the number of it's settlers, and after ineviable Anglo-Saxon expansion into the lands of the aborigine, the indigenous peoples, in fear of what was surely to come, massacred the arrivals. The Colonists, of course, responded by massacres of the aborigines, and head on conflict began. This being said, we can conclude that such hostile reactions to new comers are borne from the power wielded by the newcomers. How, then, do we explain, for example, persecution of Christians in antiquity, or for a secular example, Adolf Hitler's extermination of the disabled (his persecution of Israelites, however, had no religious background)? Early Roman Christians, such as Coryphaeus Saint Peter and Saint Paul, were few to be found, but they were massacred by the Roman government. However, Christians did refuse to worship Roman polytheistic deities and the Emperor. This lack of belief caused fear on the part of the Romans; if no one worshipped their gods, they would bring down upon the Empire a terrible wrath. If the Christians, however, abandoned their God, He'd surely bring down an awesome wrath, definitely in the afterlife. And so this fear that the Roman pagans had is what gave Christians, only the viewpoint of the Romans, so much power. Another example of such revilement is personal. On my football team in 8th grade, I was a very small defensive tackle, and so my fellow did not like me. I had little skill. This lack of skill risked the loss of games, and that was the threat that I posed.