Hollywood Torture isn’t Realistic
There’s a common trope in action films, “Torture Always Works,” in which the “good guy” anti-hero finds a suspect, beats him up, and takes whatever information is provided as absolutely guaranteed. And in fiction, it turns out that it’s almost always accurate, even if the hero lacks mind-reading powers, corroborating information, or anything to offer the tortured other than an end to the pain. In reality, such techniques are likely to run afoul of confirmation bias, as the torturer either disbelieves accurate surprising information, or believes inaccurate, unsurprising information. Alternately, the tortured might be unable to focus or think (or speak) clearly enough to answer the questions, might feed true-sounding false information in hopes of convincing the torturer to stop, or might seek to provoke the torturer into killing them - again, as a way to stop the pain. Unfortunately, public officials like President Donald Trump, Florida Governor Ron Desantis, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth appear to have mistaken the trope for real life. But imagine for a moment that you are the one being tortured. Would you tough it out? Would you give your torturer everything he wants? Would you look for a way to trick them? Would you say whatever was necessary - truth or fiction - to stop the torture?
I suspect media & entertainment show torture and similar techniques as effective for several reasons only lightly connected to reality:
It’s emotionally satisfying for the viewer to see the “bad guy” get their commeuppance.
The concept of an “anti-hero who is so good they can get away with breaking the rules” is a popular one.
It’s easier and quicker to spend five minutes on the bad guy explaining his plan that to spend all the time necessary for the heroes to sort through conflicting, ambiguous, and hard-to-obtain information
Torture’s defenders probably back it for those reasons, but I’ll add a few more speculative reasons:
Admitting that torture doesn’t work might involve people admitting they got caught up in the moment and committed illegal, immoral and ineffective acts.
We want to believe that good always triumphs, that our own sins are excusable, and that the sins of our enemies are inexcusable. Thus the “torture committed by our side” isn’t seen as bad as “torture committed by their side,” and “the people we’ve captured must be guilty of something, and thus they deserve it.”
In this and upcoming posts, I’m examining and explaining the inconsistencies and failures of several strategies, in hopes of guiding people in developing and enforcing reasonable laws - and maybe even shaping society’s stories to match reality in ways that are both realistic and entertaining. I loosely group these strategies under the banner of “machismo” since they seem to have more to do with fluffing the egos of those (stereotypically men) who apply them, and less to do with actual being effective policies. Previous posts along similar lines have included “True Power Differs from its Appearance”, “Trump, Due Process, and Immigration,” and “Authoritarians Eat Their Own.”