Has America Become the Reality
of the Abusive and Cruel
Stanford Prison
Experiment?
Experiment
author Stanford Psychologist Philip Zimbardo has a lot to say.
http://www.alternet.org/personal-health/has-america-become-stanford-prison-experiment
In 1971 Philip
Zimbardo conducted one of the most widely known social psychology
experiments of all time.
A professor at Stanford University, Zimbardo recruited 18 college-aged male
students to play the role of guards and inmates in a makeshift prison he would
construct in the basement of the psychology department. After just one day of
the experiment, these students quickly internalized the roles of the powerful
and the powerless.
“Guards” became
increasingly abusive and cruel toward “prisoners.” The prisoners responded
first by resisting and then by succumbing to despair and a sense of learned
helplessness. Although the experiment was originally planned for two weeks,
Zimbardo stopped his experiment after six days. The lesson had been learned:
When the correct group dynamics are present — and a set of rules legitimate the
behavior — otherwise “normal” and “good” individuals will abuse and bully other
human beings.
In the almost
five decades since Zimbardo conducted what is now known as the Stanford Prison
Experiment, there has been an increase in the coarseness and meanness of
America’s popular culture. What has been described as a “culture of cruelty” is
the new normal and surveillance is omnipresent. Political polarization and
dysfunction have broken the standing norms and rules of good governance in
Washington, trust in political and social institutions such as the news media
has declined, authoritarianism has increased among conservatives, the social
safety net has been torn apart and the nation’s police continue to abuse and
kill black and brown Americans with near impunity.
This is “social
dominance behavior” filtered through racism and the neoliberal economic order.
The sum total of these (and other) factors has resulted in the election of the
neofascist Donald Trump as president of the United States. In many ways,
Trump’s election was a decision by millions of American voters to punish their
fellow citizens. These people were encouraged and enabled in this desire to do
harm by their leaders in the right-wing media and by Trump himself.
How can social
psychology help us understand this moment? What lessons does the Stanford
Prison Experiment hold for American society in 2017? Are Donald Trump’s
supporters swept up in a wave of authoritarianism and bullying? Can they be
stopped? Why are conservatives so hostile to people they perceive as
“the other”? What can we do to resist Donald Trump and fight back against
the feelings of hopelessness and trauma that many Americans have experienced since
his election in November?
In an effort to
answer these questions, I recently spoke with Zimbardo, now a professor
emeritus at Stanford and also president of the Heroic
Imagination Project. He
has written dozens of articles and books, most recently “The Time Paradox:
The New Psychology of Time That Will Change Your Life” and “The Lucifer Effect:
Understanding How Good People Turn Evil.”
Our
conversation has been edited for length and clarity. A longer version can be
heard on my podcast,
available on Salon’s Featured
Audio page.
You have given
talks all over the world about your research. With the election of Donald
Trump, what is the view from abroad? How are people in other countries reacting
to what they are seeing in America?
It’s an
embarrassment. They keep saying, “We don’t understand Americans. We thought you
were smart people.” They all loved Obama overseas. He was smart. He was
articulate. He was a minority. He made very good decisions. This guy comes in
who is a billionaire. He’s used to having his own way and runs the White House
like it’s his corporation; he makes decisions without conferring with his staff
or his party. He believes climate change is a hoax despite all the evidence. He
doesn’t believe in science. Then what’s even more embarrassing is a president
that tweets online like a little kid.
In terms of the
“common man,” do you think that some of his voters are living vicariously
through him? I am of the mind that a lot of Trump’s voters supported him
precisely because they felt like he would punish somebody: It could be
Muslims; it could be black and brown people. Is that too harsh?
I think you’re
right. I think that a lot of people who are relatively powerless sign on to
people who have power and live vicariously through them. With Trump they can
say, “Wow! That’s amazing. No president ever has done what he’s done or [has
ever used] Twitter as his personal message system to say whatever he wants to
say and to do whatever he wants to do.”
Consider his
program “The Apprentice.” It was an embarrassing television show but it
remained popular. The program essentially revolved around Trump saying,
“Dismissed; get out,” and then people are in tears. I think there are people
who resonate to that and say, “Wow! Wouldn’t it be great to have that much
power to be the boss, the No. 1?” For me, that’s the opposite of what a
democracy is.
In America even
though our president was democratically elected, what we are seeing is the
equivalent of right-wing totalitarianism building up in our country where you
do things not for the power of the people but the power of the leaders. That’s
essentially what totalitarianism is — a small inner group that dictates what
everybody else will do and they take it or leave it.
There is a
great amount of research on brain structures and how conservatives are
biologically primed to overreact to fear. Can we teach people to be less
fearful and less vulnerable to these types of demagogues?
Education. We
have a lot of data on how Trump is having a really negative effect on Muslim
kids, minority kids, on Jewish kids. We’re seeing this with the burning of
mosques, burning of synagogues. There are a lot of kids who are riding the
Trump train to be bullies and say, “This is what our president says. If our
president says that you are no good, then you are no good.” One of the things
about bullying that people don’t realize is how bystanders who do nothing are
also impacted.
That is a very
important aspect of bullying culture that rarely gets commented upon.
We have a lot
of evidence that [onlookers] feel shame for the rest of their life because almost
always it was one of their friends getting bullied and they did nothing.
Bullying is now a major problem. Recent research says that bullying in
corporations is on the rise and it costs 10 percent of profits because people
who are bullied work less efficiently; they call in sick and often they quit
their job and then there are replacement costs. Now with Trump, there’s a
presidential justification for it.
What do you
think is going on with Trump’s psychology? Is there a grand strategy at work or
is he just a man-child and a malignant narcissist?
Trump is an
unconstrained present hedonist. As kids, all of us are hedonists. We’re born as
babies, we want pleasure and avoid pain, we live in the moment Because in order
to be future oriented, it depends on development of the forebrain. Future
orientation really is an advantage that humans have over animals. Animals live
for the moment. You’re hungry, you forage and you eat. My sense is that Trump
lives in a totally present hedonistic world. He makes decisions on the spur of
the moment without thinking of the consequences. That’s OK if you’re a kid. It
also is the basis for all addictions.
Addiction is
destructive.
You know the
future consequences, but [but research is never used] to change current
behavior. That is Trump: an unconstrained, unbridled present hedonist. Future
and present hedonistic people are action-oriented. They do and then they think.
Future-oriented people think, and then they do or they do not.
Many Americans
have been traumatized by this election. They are afraid. You have written a
great deal about heroism. What is a hero? And how can we use your theories
about heroism to resist Donald Trump and the fascist movement he represents?
A hero is
someone who helps another person in need, in an emergency, and aware that
there’s a potential risk. Or it’s being willing to stand up to defend a moral
cause as a whistleblower does, aware that there’s a cost. You often don’t get
promoted or you lose your job, but you do it nevertheless. That’s a classic
definition of a hero. It’s taking an action that requires moral courage, not
bravery. Bravery is heroism and the battle of first responders.
What we have
been promoting with our Heroic Imagination Project is the idea of training
people to be everyday heroes in training; meaning you just practice daily deeds
of goodness, daily deeds of kindness, daily deeds of compassion. What does that
mean? It means everybody you meet — make them feel special, learn their name,
make eye contact, shake hands, give them a compliment, remember their name. Do
little deeds, holding the door open in the elevator, helping people.
For example,
when you give money to a homeless person, don’t just give them money, ask their
name, give your name. It’s creating a sense of caring compassion, a community.
Heroism is compassion put into civic action.
You are perhaps
most well known for the Stanford Prison Experiment. In hindsight, how do you
feel about it?
It’s the most
widely known experiment in psychological history. I would do it again. Only I
would not play the role of superintendent because in that role you get sucked
into it. It was me and two students working around the clock. The prison is
breaking down every day. There are parents visiting, parole board hearings,
police and prison chaplains coming. There’s escape rumors. It was overwhelming.
I know I could not have gone another week.
What lessons do
you think the Stanford Prison Experiment holds for American society at present?
What was
dramatic about the study was the rapidity and ease with which intelligent
college students who were otherwise normal and healthy followed their roles as
prisoners and guards. We gave them no clue of what it means to be a guard. You
know, in our culture prison guards are people who have power over prisoners who
have less power — except that prisoners have the power of numbers. Guards have
to convince prisoners that even though there are fewer of them, they have the
weapons; they have other means of power to suppress them. You make them feel
helpless and ineffectual.
What scares you
right now? What gives you hope?
Despite all the
Trumpism, I’m optimistic about human nature that right will prevail over wrong.
Heroism will prevail over evil. For me, again as an educator, it’s really
important that teachers have to be anti-Trump in their own political mentality,
their own morality. Whether or not they can present those political views in
class, they can certainly prevent the Trump political views from being
espoused. When kids act Trump-like, they can stop it cold. They can stop
Trump-like bullying. They could call it for what it is.
I’m optimistic
that Trump and his ideals will go away and people will laugh about it in the
near future while saying, "How could we have been so stupid?"
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.