I think the author of the article, and the others who have responded thus far, are missing the greater point of torture.
The purpose of torture is to make people say what you want them to say.
Now, I think it is still important to post articles on how torture doesn't work. That helps, I believe, to reassure the community of like-minded people, and to reaffirm this concept in our minds, especially when the message is delivered by credible experts in the field.
Sadism may well be a part of torture, but I really do think that sadism is personal, a (sick) relationship that exists between the person being tortured and the torturer. It is difficult for me to credit that pro-torture people really receive a lot of personal gratification just from the knowledge that torture is being practiced. I may be wrong about that, but I hope I'm right.
Still, I hold that the primary purpose of torture is and has always been to force people to say what you want them to say. Torture is very old, and when practiced by a state or other organized group, is always a political tool. You break your enemies, you break anybody you managed to get your hands on whether they started out as an enemy or not, and you force a confession from them. This lends credibility to your side, reinforces your ideology, reaffirms your message in the minds of your group. As long as you and the bulk of your group are willing to engage in complete, raving sociopathy, torture is really a win-win political tool.
A couple of books that shaped my view on this include The Manipulation of Human Behavior by Biderman, and The Grand Inquisitor's Manual, by Kirsch.
I think the author of the article, and the others who have responded thus far, are missing the greater point of torture.
The purpose of torture is to make people say what you want them to say.
Now, I think it is still important to post articles on how torture doesn't work. That helps, I believe, to reassure the community of like-minded people, and to reaffirm this concept in our minds, especially when the message is delivered by credible experts in the field.
Sadism may well be a part of torture, but I really do think that sadism is personal, a (sick) relationship that exists between the person being tortured and the torturer. It is difficult for me to credit that pro-torture people really receive a lot of personal gratification just from the knowledge that torture is being practiced. I may be wrong about that, but I hope I'm right.
Still, I hold that the primary purpose of torture is and has always been to force people to say what you want them to say. Torture is very old, and when practiced by a state or other organized group, is always a political tool. You break your enemies, you break anybody you managed to get your hands on whether they started out as an enemy or not, and you force a confession from them. This lends credibility to your side, reinforces your ideology, reaffirms your message in the minds of your group. As long as you and the bulk of your group are willing to engage in complete, raving sociopathy, torture is really a win-win political tool.
A couple of books that shaped my view on this include The Manipulation of Human Behavior by Biderman, and The Grand Inquisitor's Manual, by Kirsch.