A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

The psychology of torture

Marvin made the point in comments here that it’s depressing to even be arguing about the morality of torture. After all, the wrongness of torture is something we should all simply take for granted, and the fact that it’s become a contested topic says something really bad about where we are as a country. Personally, I have a hard time coming up with premises more basic than the wrongness of torture from which I could argue.

All of which makes me wonder: why is this coming up now? During the Cold War, when, by any objective measure, we were facing a much more dire threat, this was not an issue. Indeed, the US under President Reagan signed the UN Convention Against Torture, which prohibits torture or cruel and degrading treatment under all circumstances, including “war, threat of war, internal political instability, public emergency, terrorist acts, violent crime, or any form of armed conflict,” according to Wikipedia.

Which is not to say torture never occurred, whether committed by us or our proxies. But was anyone publicly arguing that torture was the right thing to do? Even though the threat of a nuclear-armed Soviet Union was clearly far more serious when we signed the Convention Against Torture than the threat of radical Islamic terrorism is now, I’m guessing that 9/11 made a lot of people feel more vulnerable than they ever had before. Is that what makes torture seem, to some people, like a viable option?

UPDATE: See Glenn Greenwald, who makes some similar points better and at greater length. See – this is why I don’t blog about this stuff. 🙂

, ,

9 responses to “The psychology of torture”

  1. Camassia

    Hmmm. I don’t know if the Cold War is actually that analogous. True, the Soviet Union was a greater threat in theory, but it never actually perpetrated an attack on U.S. soil. World War II might be a better analogy, and for all I know there were Americans advocating torture back then (heck, they put up with those internment camps).

    Also, I wonder how many 20th-century Americans really opposed torture, at bottom. I remember a professor of mine who was a reporter in St. Louis for several decades said that the press used to have a “don’t ask, don’t tell” attitude about police brutality, even though they could sometimes hear the thumping through the walls of the interrogation rooms. And now that I’m more attuned to these things I can remember plenty of scenes from popular novels and movies and so on where heroes used interrogation methods that would be defined as torture now, but no one ever called it that.

    This is sounding even more depressing when I put it like that, but maybe it’s a good thing that the “gentlemen’s agreement” around torture has been broken. If people are obliged to put the T-word on what they are willing to do it at least makes them confront the fact.

    Reply
  2. Rick Ritchie

    Greenwald’s article was overall good, but perhaps overstated. While I think many on the right would do just what he says, labeling anyone who held to Ronald Reagan’s views on torture as hard-left, I think this would be far from universal. I have little sense of how the numbers would run. But while fewer conservatives would agree with Reagan now than pre 9/11, I would suspect some still would, and many would probably consider it a respectable position even if they did not hold it themselves. But Greenwald’s quotes do show just how far the neocon wing can be from Reagan.

    Aside from Camille Paglia, I think Greenwald is the most worthwhile read at Salon.com.

    Reply
  3. Lee

    Camassia – point taken, though I do think think there’s something to be said for setting a public standard as a yardstick by which to judge ourselves, which is what the Convention on Torture does, among other things. It’s pretty worrisome that there’s a vocal minority(?) now calling for the de jure embrace of torture even if before there was a tacit understanding that dark men might be doing dastardly things in secret to keep us safe.

    Rick – I agree that Greenwald has a tendency to overstate things and that there are sound conservatives on this issue.

    Reply
  4. Torture « I Think ^(Link)……

    […] A ThinkingReed who is on the side of “torture is always wrong” (And to him, and many others, enhanced interrogations are torture. which is a perfectly fine side to be on) notes that this (torture) wasn’t discussed during the cold war like it is now. Even Reagan signed the convention against torture during that time. Then Lee notes that Which is not to say torture never occurred, whether committed by us or our proxies. But was anyone publicly arguing that torture was the right thing to do? […]

    Reply
  5. by stander

    So!!! Where were all of you anti-torture people when Saddam Hussein was doing his thing. I didn’t hear you. I am not pro-torture BUT get over it. What’s done is done. My guess is many of the anti-torture folks are pro-choice folks. Tell me abortion is not torture.

    Reply
  6. Lee

    “By stander,” thanks for commenting. However, your arguments don’t hold any water. I don’t know of a single person who opposes torture when the US does that wouldn’t (or didn’t) disapprove of it when other countries do it. Although, wouldn’t you agree that we bear more responsibility for what our own government does? (By the way, the fact that Saddam Hussein indisputably tortured people doesn’t show that the Iraq war was ok.)

    Is abortion torture? Well, depends on when it occurs. A very early abortion couldn’t be considered torture since the embryo/fetus isn’t sentient. However, later in pregnancy, when the fetus can likely feel pain, there is a case to be made for it.

    Reply
  7. Marvin

    Stander, I can only speak for myself and not the “anti-torture lobby,” as if, sadly, being anti-torture has been reduced to a special interest and not a core value of American civilization, but anyway, when Saddam Hussein was doing his torturing thing, I was proud of the fact that, even though I didn’t live in a perfect country, I did live in a country that institutionalized basic human rights. A small, but significant example: I was proud that I lived in a country that, during World War II, was the one that German troops would rather surrender to than the Russians, whose reputation for brutality was unparalleled.

    Much to my chagrin, the Bush administration shredded that proud legacy.

    Torture is a crime under U.S. and international law. I am not aware that there is a statute of limitations on torture. If there is, I can’t imagine it has already passed in these few short years. I think that torture, like murder, rape, armed robbery and other violent crimes, should be prosecuted, not “gotten over.” As if the victims of torture could so easily “get over it.”

    Yes, yes, anti-torture equals pro-choice. And pro-life seems to equal pro death penalty, does it not?

    Come now, if we’re going to have a debate, then let’s bring something a little less shopworn than “You’re a hypocrite because your thoughts on issue X don’t line up perfectly with your thoughts on issue Y.” As Emerson said, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” Or as many have said, “Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.” Person X may be dead wrong about Issue A, and B, but inexplicably right about Issue C.

    I don’t know what you think about abortion, the death penalty, your homeowner’s association covenants, or anything else, but as far as torture goes, you’re dead wrong, and I can’t believe we’re even having this conversation.

    Reply
  8. by stander

    Marvin/Lee – We are having the discussion because torture has been used since time began. All countries have done it including the holier than thou Europeans but we made the mistake of acknowledging it.

    Torture is subjective, your definition would probably vary greatly from mine or someone else’s. The three persons who do need to “get over it” wouldn’t need to had they not been involved in attempting to kill all of us “infidels”.

    Although no one has mentioned it we all know what this is about, so if we are to start prosecuting previous administrations for “crimes” committed, let’s start with President Clinton for passing military secrets to the Chinese. If as Lee mentions, we all bear more responsibility for what our own government does then we should all share equally in the punishment, that would take some of the zeal out of those so anxious to pursue this.

    It seems to be awfully easy to sit around and be a Monday morning quarterback.

    You know what I think about abortion, the death penalty and my HOA are another discussion.

    Reply
  9. Lee

    So, if everybody does it, it’s ok?

    If torture is subjective, is all morality subjective? What makes torture so special? Domestic and international law has had no particularl difficulty defining torture.

    And why put crimes in square quotes? If someone broke the law, then it’s a crime, full stop. No ironic quotes required. I’m happy to apply that standard across the board.

    (Incidentally, it doesn’t follow from what I said that we all bear equal responsibility for what happened. People in a position of authority whose job it is to execute the laws bear special responsibility. However, I do think we should repent and try to make reparations for the things our government does as our representative, and work to have policies changed.)

    Reply

Leave a reply to Lee Cancel reply