We are still talking about torture. Did the CIA mislead House Speak Nancy Pelosi? Did enhanced interrogation techniques keep the country safe as Vice President Dick Cheney, his daughter Liz and others claim? Ought there be a truth commission or prosecutions or private law suits? Where is our faith? Do we believe in torture? Do we believe in something else?
A scenario.
8 AM
Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick. . . .
The time bomb is ticking. It is set to go off in a large building sitting at a busy intersection of a big city at mid-day. If it goes off, the death tolls will be horrendous. We have a terrorist in custody, a member of the group we know is responsible for planting the bomb. It is time to take extraordinary measures to get the information we need to find and to defuse the bomb. It is time to call Jack Bauer.
8:30 AM
Jack arrives. We brief him about the situation. He knows this group. He has used harsh techniques on their members in the past. He knows they are tough customers. “I have another idea,” he says. “We have to try something different with these people. I’ll be back.”
9:00 AM
He races through city traffic as if he were Jason Bourne evading his own CIA. He arrives at a nondescript building where a mild mannered psycho therapist is writing notes about his last patient.
9:20 AM
He bangs with urgency on Paul Weston’s door. He has seen Paul in the past because his work has taken its psychological toll on him. He himself is tortured by the torture that he administers. Paul comes to the door and calmly asks the reason for the visit. “Come with me. I’ll explain on the way.”
9:40 AM
Jack and Paul arrive at the remote location where the terrorist is being held. Paul goes straight to work. No coffee. No tea. No sympathy. Paul immediately asks: “Who hurt you?” “What?” An incredulous terrorist replies.
“Who hurt you?” Paul asks again. The terrorist is stunned by the question. Who is this man? He asks himself: “What kind of question is this? Is this Steve Carell’s version of Get Smart?” The terrorist was ready for waterboarding, beatings, walling, even electric shock. He had trained for these. His cell had planned an alternative event if one or more of its members went silent. It knew about how long a person could hold out under torture and had devised a plan B. Now here is this question out of nowhere.
“I do not understand the question.” The terrorist says truthfully.
“People do harm out of their own pain.” Paul’s voice is low, steady, matter of fact. He is not thinking of the bomb or the thousands who may die, he is thinking only of the human being in front of him. “People do harm out of their own will to power born of fear and ignorance. It is easier to hurt others rather than face your own fear, your own pain. It is easier to say this is what God wants rather than take responsibility.”
The terrorist begins an ideological rant. “Who hurt you?” Paul asks again. Still patient. Jack Bauer watches the clock. “Who hurt you?”
Finally the terrorist breaks. His personal and political pain comes flowing out of him like a raging river. He gives up the location of the bomb. He discloses the other members of the cell and their outside contact, the person who knows plan B.
11 AM
The bomb squad defuses the bomb. Jack Bauer apprehends the contact who knows plan B. He brings her to Paul and another therapy session begins.
Violence or Empathy
This story is fiction. It is as much fiction as the ticking time bomb hypothetical that people who are willing to torture use. The one difference is that one has faith in violence; the other has faith in the power of empathy to keep us safe. That there have been no attacks in the United States since 9/11 is not proof that torture is the necessary and sufficient condition for this result. It could be that there have been no attacks despite its use.
Violence is a violation. It is a negation of human dignity. It is a denial of the human right to live free from violence. One could say that terrorists have forfeited their right to be free from violence. One could say they have negated their own humanity. However, the moment we condone and apply violence, we become participants in the violation, the negation, the denial of their humanity and of our own. Faith in violence trusts in the negation of our humanity and the humanity of the terrorist.
By contrast, empathy acknowledges the humanity of the Other, even the terrorist Other. It is identification. And though we hate the act, we recognize that the terrorists have their reasons for doing what they do. It refuses the logic of ontological evil that adheres to individuals. It recognizes that terrorists are human beings making an awful choice. Empathy makes the case for another choice. Faith in empathy trusts in the affirmation of our humanity and of the humanity of the terrorist.
Whether we choose faith in violence or faith in empathy to keep us safe is a mirror into our own souls. It is a mirror that reflects the soul of a nation.
Dr. Valerie Elverton Dixon is an independent scholar who publishes lectures and essays at JustPeaceTheory.com. She received her Ph.D. in religion and society from Temple University and taught Christian ethics at United Theological Seminary and Andover Newton Theological School.
