Can empathy serve as a reliable guide to action? David Brooks, in his recent article “The Limits of Empathy,” suggests that empathy is no guarantee that caring action will take place. Participants in Milgram’s famous 1950s experiments willingly inflicted what they thought were near-lethal electric shocks despite suffering tremendously. Nazi executors early in the war wept while killing Jews. And yet those strong feelings didn’t stop them. Why does this happen?
Empathy, Shame, and Fear
I have been haunted for years by this great puzzle, reading, thinking, and writing about it. Brooks suggests that “People who actually perform pro-social action don’t only feel for those who are suffering, they feel compelled to act by a sense of duty. Their lives are structured by sacred codes.” My investigations lead me to think that “a sense of duty” is part of the problem, not the solution. A sense of duty usually gets instilled in us through fear and shame, leading us to act based on external considerations while doubting our own intuitive heart response. Who of us won’t remember times when despite being moved to do something caring we didn’t because of fear? Jason Marsh, in his response to Brooks, retells the story of Samuel and Pearl Oliner’s research findings about the empathic values on which rescuers – people who saved Jews during the Holocaust – were raised. The Oliners also point out that rescuers tended to be raised with little punishment. When there is no punishment, there is less shame and fear, and more willingness and capacity to honor our empathic inclinations.
I hate to keep repeating myself, but the issue won’t go away. Torture is morally wrong, and it is clearly prohibited by international and American law. Thus, I find it shocking that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld openly admit to authorizing torture, and that they do so with impunity. And if Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Abu Faraj al-Libbi — who allegedly provided information that helped us locate Osama bin Laden — were prisoners of war, then their torturers committed war crimes.
Now, in the wake of bin Laden’s death, right-wing ideologues are once again defending the use of torture.
In response, opponents of torture are trying to prove that it did not play a positive role in the capture of bin Laden. For example, Eugene Robinson says in today’s Washington Post that “torture wasn’t the key to finding bin Laden.”
Well, it doesn’t matter if it was. Torture is wrong. Period. And it is a crime.
Bin Laden’s capture does not justify torture. Terrorists do not need him in order to operate. I am happy we got him, but sadly it probably doesn’t really matter that much.
“This weekend many actions are planned nationwide in solidarity with PFC Manning, and in protest of the US descent into the criminal insanity of torture,” writes Lynn Feinerman.
Torturing The Truth-Tellers, Silencing The Soothsayers
by Lynn Feinermann
Such distinguished heads as P.J. Crowley’s (the former United States Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs) are falling over the issue of the imprisonment without trial of Private First Class Bradley Manning, the 23-year-old U.S. Army soldier accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks. And it has become quite clear that the conditions of PFC Manning’s detention in US military custody constitute torture – legally, morally and physically.
Private Manning is one of over 50,000 prisoners in the United States who are presently kept in cruel and inhumane solitary confinement. No other nation in the world comes close to isolating that many prisoners. Most nations have phased out solitary confinement, but its use has skyrocketed in the US, in a futile obsession with “security.” Further, through legislation like the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and Special Administrative Measures – both instituted during Clinton’s presidency – the US has made its treatment of those consigned to solitary even more draconian.
Read Glenn Greenwald’s writings online or listen to his reports on Democracy Now!, on the regimen imposed upon Bradley Manning, and you can grasp the brutality, cruelty and vengefulness with which he is treated. He has been locked up for almost one year without trial. From the looks of cases like that of Fahad Hashmi, it would appear that the attenuation of Bradley’s imprisonment without trial is purposely and deliberately intended to break him – to drive him to a state of insanity or incompetence.
The Waterboard. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Creative Commons/Waterboard.org
On February 14th, David Frum, the Bush speechwriter-turned-pundit, published an Op-Ed for CNN.com that was truly Orwellian in nature. For those who enjoy seeing politics and facts totally at odds in print, Frum’s column was cause for celebration. I’m calling it here — 2011 already has a strong contender for the top prize of most hilarious Doublespeak! Despite strong opposition, the winner for 2010 was Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s accusation that Europe’s general commitment to peace was a threat to its security. Gates’s “War is Peace” formulation was classic Age d’Or Bush administration rhetoric- a sentiment so at odds with reality that one has to laugh. Leave it then, to Frum, who gave the world the “Axis of Evil,” to deliver his own Valentine to fans of unintentionally hilarious authoritarianism.
Frum’s righteous indignation stems from a trip to Switzerland that former President Bush had to cancel over fear that he would be prosecuted for torture. Following the submission of a 2,500-page case against Bush by Human Rights groups, Frum argues that the possibility that Swiss authorities might prosecute an admitted torturer is wrong. The idea of charging a torturer with War Crimes is so hateful to Frum that he declares:
This use of law as a weapon of politics is an assault upon the basic norms of American constitutional democracy.
Last week in the House, eight Tea Party Republicans (along with 18 others) joined with 122 Democrats in Congress in refusing to extend the Patriot Act.
Opposition was expressed in particular towards parts of the Patriot Act that would authorize the government to continue to monitor the library records of American citizens, use roving wiretaps during surveillance operations, and spy on non-citizens who are not connected to any identified terrorist group. In an interview on MSNBC, progressive Rep. Dennis Kucinich praised the Tea Party Congressmen who opposed the Patriot Act, saying they are clearly serious about civil liberties and about preventing the government from reaching into people’s private affairs. He hopes to work with Tea Party Caucus members in the future on anti-war initiatives.
What Kucinich failed to mention, however, was that 44 out of 52 members of the Tea Party Caucus actually backed the extension of the Patriot Act, which is stunning, given the libertarian principles professed by the movement. It will be interesting to see what happens when Republicans bring the Patriot Act up for another vote this coming week.
No matter how it all turns out, I think it is refreshing to see at least some Tea Party libertarians stand on principle. The White House, however, was reportedly not happy.
During the interview on MSNBC, Kucinich offered the White House the following advice:
This is about the Constitution. And I think it would behoove the White House to align itself with the Constitution. That’s a very strong position to take…. The people from the Tea Party take the First Amendment seriously — right of free speech, freedom of association. They take the Fourth Amendment very seriously, right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. These are things that the White House would, I think, find even more support, if it chose to align itself with the Constitution of the United States.
Contrary to the claims of President Obama in his recent state of the union address, news reports assert that the US is still torturing. Anand Gopal’s recent article in the Nation magazine reveals the existence of many secret field sites in Afghanistan where torture is continuing apace, while the US maintains a somewhat cleaner game in Bagram Air Base.
And while the US courts have blocked torture survivors like Maher Arar in their efforts to sue the US government for damages, and the Obama justice department has swept all the crimes against humanity of the Bush years under the rug, a sinister blowback of this “war on terror” is creeping into the US itself.
Nov 25 2009: Brooklyn College Professor Jeanne Theoharris speaking at the weekly vigil for Fahad Hashmi, a former Brooklyn College student who has been in solitary confinement for three years without a trial
One of the worst cases is that of Fahad Hashmi, suspected of al Qaeda involvement. He has been kept in solitary confinement for three years without trial.
Recently on DEMOCRACY NOW!, Dr. Atul Gawande, a physician and surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and a teacher at Harvard University, spoke about medical research into the effects of solitary confinement on prisoners, hostages and detainees. Researchers did brain scans and found that people who have sustained head injuries have the same scan indications as people in solitary confinement for long periods. Said Dr. Gawande on air, “…The science of what happens to people deprived of social contact is they have to fight for their sanity. And many lose their sanity. That…. led me to ask the question, is solitary confinement, the way we’re practicing it now, torture?”
This morning I woke up at “Oh Dark Thirty” (5:30am for you civilians) and by 6:34 was on a train heading to San Mateo for a meeting with staffers of Representative Jackie Speier (D – California) to talk about torture. The organizer of this gathering (BARCAT – Bay Area Religious Campaign Against Torture) had asked each person in the delegation to be prepared to share ONE thing about torture, that represented their unique perspective on the issue. I wear many hats when I attend such a meeting. Today, I was representing Multifaith Voices for Peace and Justice, a ragtag group of folks from various faith traditions who have been working for peace and social justice since the lead up to the Iraq war. I call myself a Jewbyterian, Jewish by birth, Jewish in much of my spirituality, but who spends most of my time among progressive Presbyterians at the First Presbyterian Church of Palo Alto.
I was on a radio show in Ottawa yesterday opposing the decision by the administration of Carleton University to fire Hassan Diab. There were several challenges involved for me, both with deciding to appear on the Gerry Cammy Show and with the opposition to Diab’s dismissal.
Gerry, who is a friend of mine in spite of the fact that he is a conservative, invited me to appear on the show two weeks ago. I initially refused. Rania Tfaily, Hassan Diab’s wife, later asked me to do so. I appeared with two other guests. Eric Vernon is a senior staff member for Canadian Jewish Congress in Ottawa. Ian Lee is Director of MBA programs at Carleton University.
by: Dave Belden on August 24th, 2009 | Comments Off
I’ve been on vacation for ten days and apart from one post about the netroots and health care have given not a thought to Tikkun Daily. So it’s great to be back and to get a press release like this one in my inbox. I am posting it whole. It’s from Physicians for Human Rights, a great group.
Rights Group Applauds Appointment of Prosecutor in CIA Torture Cases
Health Professionals Must Also Be Investigated, Says PHR
Cambridge, MA — Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) welcomes actions taken which demonstrate that the Obama Administration is committed to ending the use of abusive interrogation techniques and to initiating a process of holding accountable those responsible for the regime of torture. However, PHR urges the Administration to pursue any investigation up the chain of command to those officials who authorized and supervised the use of illegal techniques.
“Attorney General Holder’s decision to appoint a special prosecutor to re-examine a number of cases of alleged torture and abuse is another sign that the Administration’s ‘don’t look back’ policy is being reassessed,” said Frank Donaghue, PHR CEO.
Everybody wants to talk to someone…
Everybody wants to talk to someone…
My job is to discover the one you want to talk to and become that one.
A U.S. Army interrogator…
Those lines in the song you are about to hear sum up the job of a U.S. Army interrogator. Recognizing that everybody wants to spill their guts to someone, an interrogator has to figure out who that person is, and become that person, so that the detainee/prisoner, talks to the interrogator.
John Crigler, performing his original composition, “A U.S. Army Interrogator.”
We’ll post more segments here which came from an incredible gathering of people that took place in June 2009 that included a former Army interrogator, a former senior CIA analyst, a psychologist compiling powerful oral histories from people who committed torture from WWII until today, an award-winning religious/political columnist who also happens to be a Presbyterian minister, and victims of torture.
We’re editing the videos now and will post new ones as they are ready.
Deputy Commander Mark Fallon objected to the interrogation techniques used at Guantanamo, and raised concerns through NCIS leadership. He refused to participate in the torture of detainees, and made continued efforts to urge Pentagon decision-makers to reconsider more effective and humane interrogation techniques. His concerns, vis-à-vis NCIS Director David Brant, eventually reached Alberto Mora, who took up the issue at the Pentagon.
Monday evening at 6 pm Pacific time we welcome Lynn Feinerman as our guest on the Tikkun/NSP Phone Forum, to talk about her article“Life After Torture and Torment”in the May/June Tikkun.
Today is United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.
Anniversaries can be important. This Friday [today] marks the 22nd anniversary of the U.N. Convention against Torture, ratified and signed under President Reagan. Last Friday marked the 150th day of the presidency of Barack Obama, who is trying to put a definitive end to the torture approved by the Bush-Cheney administration.
That Obama has not been able to do so is our collective shame. Worse still, the president has apparently concluded that he lacks the support to deter future abominations of this sort by launching a proper investigation and holding to account those responsible.
That’s from an article in the Mercury News by Diana Gibson and Ray McGovern promoting this event, for those who live in the Bay Area:
Is Pelosi privately wishing that she had not so pusillanimous on torture back in 2002-3, now that her silence then has lost her the moral high ground now? Or does she still believe that her caution then helped her get to her majority now? The public still seems mostly pro torture, we learn again today.
I find politics a mystery. I have little idea how leadership can turn public opinion around. I never understood how industry lobbying turned the public and the Congress (or was it only the Congress?) decisively against universal health insurance in the first Clinton goverment. I understood war fever after 9/11, and going into Afghanistan, but I never understood why the Democrats supported the Iraq War and torture. Courage then would surely have paid off in a much bigger majority for Pelosi now–wouldn’t it? The progressive in me says yes, the historian in me says I don’t know. It’s a mystery. I don’t know if Obama is pusuing a wise strategy that will turn out to lay the foundations for a longterm progressive majority, as some imagine, or if he is blowing it, as I and many others think he is.
A rare moment. And entirely welcome. Krugman talks about our spiritual need.
Arlen Specter, in the SF Chronicle yesterday, said there was no evidence of criminal acts by the Bush government. Over a hundred dead in our torture mills isn’t evidence? He should watch Torturing Democracy.
I have been haunted for years by this great puzzle, reading, thinking, and writing about it. Brooks suggests that “People who actually perform pro-social action don’t only feel for those who are suffering, they feel compelled to act by a sense of duty. Their lives are structured by sacred codes.” My investigations lead me to think that “a sense of duty” is part of the problem, not the solution. A sense of duty usually gets instilled in us through fear and shame, leading us to act based on external considerations while doubting our own intuitive heart response. Who of us won’t remember times when despite being moved to do something caring we didn’t because of fear? Jason Marsh, in his response to Brooks, retells the story of Samuel and Pearl Oliner’s research findings about the empathic values on which rescuers – people who saved Jews during the Holocaust – were raised. The Oliners also point out that rescuers tended to be raised with little punishment. When there is no punishment, there is less shame and fear, and more willingness and capacity to honor our empathic inclinations.
Is Pelosi privately wishing that she had not so pusillanimous on torture back in 2002-3, now that her silence then has lost her the moral high ground now? Or does she still believe that her caution then helped her get to her majority now? The public still seems mostly pro torture, 
