Oz is an HBO program set in a prison with lots of hard core criminals and
hard core guards.
At 01:02 PM 5/10/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>Peter,
>
>What Oz is?
>
>Re the torture imagery in American life, the few times I saw NYPD blue,
>it seemed to me that it was in the verge of legitimizing the use of
>torture as a way to collect criminal info. Of course, in a "softened"
>way, but the underlying message was quite violent and, of course,the
>naive viewer couldnīt help but identifying with the good cops. As 9/11
>directed viewers to see with New eyes American movies, the Iraq Torture
>case should do the same thing. There is plenty of cases where physical
>abuse is done by the "good" guys, but always in a threshold that an
>average viewer can tolerate (and enjoy...)
>
>David
>
>Quoting Peter Smagorinsky <smago@coe.uga.edu>:
>
> > 3ce7295.jpg
> > At 10:52 AM 5/10/2004 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Why everyone's not a torturer
> > >
> > >By Stephen Reicher and Alex Haslam
> > >Psychologists
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Guards and prisoners, taking part in The Experiment for the BBC in
> > 2002
> > >So groups of people in positions of unaccountable power naturally
> > >resort to violence, do they? Not according to research conducted in
> > a
> > >BBC experiment.
> > >The photographs from Abu Ghraib prison showing Americans abusing
> > Iraqi
> > >prisoners make us recoil and lead us to distance ourselves from
> > their
> > >horror and brutality. Surely those who commit such acts are not
> > like
> > >us? Surely the perpetrators must be twisted or disturbed in some
> > way?
> > >They must be monsters. We ourselves would never condone or
> > contribute
> > >to such events.
> > >
> > >Sadly, 50 years of social psychological research indicates that
> > such
> > >comforting thoughts are deluded. A series of major studies have
> > shown
> > >that even well-adjusted people, when divided into groups and placed
> > in
> > >competition against each other, can become abusive and violent.
> > >
> > > OTHER RESEARCH
> > >Stanley Milgram at Yale instructed experimenters to give electric
> > >shocks to another
> > >They did so, despite person's cries of pain
> > >
> > >
> > >In depth: After Saddam
> > >Most notoriously, the 1971 Stanford prison experiment, conducted
> > by
> > >Philip Zimbardo and colleagues, seemingly showed that young
> > students
> > >who were assigned to the role of guard quickly became sadistically
> > >abusive to the students assigned to the role of prisoners.
> > >
> > >Combined with lessons from history, the disturbing implication of
> > such
> > >research is that evil is not the preserve of a small minority of
> > >exceptional individuals. We all have the capacity to behave in
> > evil
> > >ways. This idea was famously developed by Hannah Arendt whose
> > >observations of the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, led her to
> > remark
> > >that what was most frightening was just how mild and ordinary he
> > >looked. His evil was disarmingly banal.
> > >
> > >
> > >The latest pictures show detainees being threatened with dogs (AP
> > >Photo/Courtesy of The New Yorker)
> > >In order to explain events in Iraq, one might go further and
> > conclude
> > >that the torturers were victims of circumstances, that they lost
> > their
> > >moral compass in the group and did things they would normally
> > abhor.
> > >Indeed, using Zimbardo's findings as evidence, this is precisely
> > what
> > >some people do conclude. But this is bad psychology and it is bad
> > >ethics.
> > >
> > >It is bad psychology because it suggests we can explain human
> > behaviour
> > >without needing to scrutinize the wider culture in which it is
> > located.
> > >It is bad ethics because it absolves everyone from any
> > responsibility
> > >for events - the perpetrators, ourselves as constituents of the
> > wider
> > >society, and the leaders of that society.
> > >
> > >In the situation of Abu Ghraib, some reports have indicated that
> > the
> > >guards were following orders from intelligence officers and
> > >interrogators in order to soften up the prisoners for
> > interrogation.
> > >
> > >If that is true, then clearly the culture in which these soldiers
> > were
> > >immersed was one in which they were encouraged to see and treat
> > Iraqis
> > >as subhuman. Other army units almost certainly had a very
> > different
> > >culture and this provides a second explanation of why some people
> > in
> > >some units may have tortured, but others did not.
> > >
> > >Grotesque fun
> > >
> > >Perhaps the best evidence that such factors were at play is the
> > fact
> > >that the pictures were taken at all. Reminiscent of the postcards
> > that
> > >lynch mobs circulated to advertise their activities, the torture
> > was
> > >done proudly and with a grotesque sense of fun.
> > >
> > >
> > >'Those in the photos wanted others to know what they had done'
> > >(AP/Courtesy The New Yorker)
> > >Those in the photos wanted others to know what they had done,
> > >presumably believing that the audience would approve. This sense
> > of
> > >approval is very important, since there is ample evidence that
> > people
> > >are more likely to act on any inclinations to behave in obnoxious
> > ways
> > >when they sense - correctly or incorrectly - that they have
> > broader
> > >support.
> > >
> > >So where did the soldiers in Iraq get that sense from? This takes us
> > to
> > >a critical influence on group behaviour: leadership. In the
> > studies,
> > >leadership - the way in which experimenters either overtly or
> > tacitly
> > >endorsed particular forms of action - was crucial to the way
> > >participants behaved.
> > >
> > > Many guards in our experiment did not wish to act - or be seen
> > to
> > >act - as bullies or oppressors
> > >
> > >Thus one reason why the guards in our own research for the BBC did
> > not
> > >behave as brutally as those in the Stanford study, was that we did
> > not
> > >instruct them to behave in this way.
> > >
> > >Zimbardo, in contrast, told his participants: "You can create in
> > the
> > >prisoners feelings of boredom, a sense of fear to some degree, you
> > can
> > >create a notion of arbitrariness that their life is totally
> > controlled
> > >by us, by the system, you, me - and they'll have no privacy.... In
> > >general what all this leads to is a sense of powerlessness".
> > >
> > >Officers' messages
> > >
> > >In light of this point it is interesting to ask what messages were
> > >being provided by fellow and, more critically, senior officers in
> > the
> > >units where torture took place? Did those who didn't approve fail
> > to
> > >speak out for fear of being seen as weak or disloyal? Did senior
> > >officers who knew what was going on turn a blind eye or else
> > simply
> > >file away reports of misbehaviour?
> > >
> > >All these things happened after the My Lai massacre, and in many
> > ways
> > >the responses to an atrocity tell us most about how it can happen
> > in
> > >the first place. They tell us how murderers and torturers can begin
> > to
> > >believe that they will not be held to account for what they do, or
> > even
> > >that their actions are something praiseworthy. The more they
> > perceive
> > >that torture has the thumbs up, the more they will give it a thumbs
> > up
> > >themselves.
> > >
> > >So how do we prevent these kinds of episodes? One answer is to
> > ensure
> > >that people are always made aware of their other moral commitments
> > and
> > >their accountability to others. Whatever the pressures within
> > their
> > >military group, their ties to others must never be broken. Total
> > and
> > >secret institutions, where people are isolated from contact with
> > all
> > >others are breeding grounds for atrocity. Similarly, there are
> > great
> > >dangers in contracting out security functions to private
> > contractors
> > >which lack fully developed structures of public accountability.
> > >
> > >Power vacuum
> > >
> > >Another answer is to look at the culture of our institutions and
> > the
> > >role of leaders in framing that culture. Bad leadership can permit
> > >torture in two ways. Sometimes leaders can actively promote
> > oppressive
> > >values. This is akin to what happened in Zimbardo's study and may
> > be
> > >the case in certain military intelligence units. But sometimes
> > leaders
> > >can simply fail to promote anything and hence create a vacuum of
> > power.
> > >
> > >
> > >'Inmates' in The Experiment in their cells
> > >
> > >
> > >Is it in anyone to abuse a captive?
> > >Our own findings indicated that where such a vacuum exists, people
> > are
> > >more likely to accept any clear line of action which is vigorously
> > >proposed. Often, then, tyranny follows from powerlessness rather
> > than
> > >power. In either case, the failure of leaders to champion clear
> > humane
> > >and democratic values is part of the problem.
> > >
> > >But it is not enough to consider leadership in the military. One
> > must
> > >look more widely at the messages and the values provided in the
> > >community at large. That means that we must address the anti-Arab
> > and
> > >anti-Muslim sentiment in our society. A culture where we have got
> > used
> > >to pictures of Iraqi prisoners semi-naked, chained and humiliated
> > can
> > >create a climate in which torturers see themselves as heroes
> > rather
> > >than villains.
> > >
> > >Again, for such a culture to thrive it is not necessary for everyone
> > to
> > >embrace such sentiments, it is sufficient simply for those who
> > would
> > >oppose them to feel muted and out-of-step with societal norms.
> > >
> > >Leaders' language
> > >
> > >And we must also look at political leadership. When administration
> > >officials talk about cleaning out "rats' nests" of Iraqi dissidents,
> > it
> > >likens Iraqis to vermin. Note, for example, that just before the
> > >Rwandan genocide, Hutu extremists started referring to Tutsi's
> > >as "cockroaches".
> > >
> > >
> > >The US is trying to limit the damage after an abuse scandal
> > >(AP/Courtesy The New Yorker)
> > >Such use of language again creates a climate in which perpetrators
> > of
> > >atrocity can maintain the illusion that they are nobly doing what
> > >others know must be done. The torturers in Iraq may or may not
> > have
> > >been following direct orders from their leaders, but they were
> > almost
> > >certainly allowed to feel that they were behaving as good
> > followers.
> > >
> > >So if we want to understand why torture occurs, it is important to
> > >consider the psychology of individuals, of groups, and of society.
> > >Groups do indeed affect the behaviour of individuals and can lead
> > them
> > >to do things they never anticipated. But how any given group
> > affects
> > >our behaviour depends upon the norms and values of that specific
> > group.
> > >
> > >Evil can become banal, but so can humanism. The choice is not denied
> > to
> > >us by human nature but rests in our own hands. Hence, we need a
> > >psychological analysis that addresses the values and beliefs that
> > we,
> > >our institutions, and our leaders promote. These create the
> > conditions
> > >in which would-be torturers feel either emboldened or unable to
> > act.
> > >
> > >We need an analysis that makes us accept rather than avoid our
> > >responsibilities. Above all, we need a psychology which does not
> > >distance us from torture but which requires us to look closely at
> > the
> > >ways in which we and those who lead us are implicated in a society
> > >which makes barbarity possible.
> > >
> > >Alex Haslam is a professor of psychology at University of Exeter
> > and
> > >editor of the European Journal of Social Psychology. Stephen Reicher
> > is
> > >a professor of psychology at University of St Andrews, past editor
> > of
> > >the British Journal of Social Psychology and a fellow of the Royal
> > >Society of Edinburgh.
> > >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 12:05:48 PST