Introduction
"Researchers found that both inmates and guards exhibited pathological reactions. During the experiment, guards were divided into three categories: (1) those who were "firm but fair," (2) those who were passive and reluctant to use coercion, and, among the different interest groups, (3) those who "greatly overstepped their bounds by engaging in cruelty and harassment." Day after day, guards were observed to "generally" escalate their harassment of inmates. The researchers reported: "We observed an escalation of inmate harassment." A sample of healthy, unaffected American students was divided into a group of inmates by guards who appeared to take pleasure in insulting, threatening, humiliating, and "dehumanizing" their peers. Due to the random assignment of subjects, the study concluded that the observed behaviors resulted from situational rather than personality factors: the negative and antisocial reactions observed were not the product of an environment created by a combination of deviant personalities, but rather the consequence of an inherently pathological situation, capable of perverting and distorting the behavior of fundamentally normal individuals. The anomaly lay in the psychological nature of the situation, not in those experiencing it. The authors analyzed how interactions between inmates and guards shaped the evolution of the guards' use of power. This use of power was self-aggrandizing and self-perpetuating. The guards' power, initially based on an arbitrary label, intensified each time a threat was perceived against the inmates, and this new level became the starting point for hostility and harassment. The most hostile guards on each team spontaneously rose to positions of responsibility. They gave orders and decided on punishments. They became role models whose behavior was imitated by other team members. Despite minimal contact between the three teams of guards and nearly 16 hours a day spent away from their colleagues, the absolute level of aggression, as well as its more subtle and “creative” forms, increased exponentially. Not appearing tough and arrogant was perceived as a sign of weakness by the guards, and even the “good” guards, less prone to power struggles, adhered to the unspoken norm of never contradicting or even interfering with the actions of a more hostile guard while on duty. In a paper published 25 years after the Stanford Prison Experiment, Haney and Zimbardo noted that their initial study “highlighted how institutional settings can develop a dynamic of their own, independent of the wishes, intentions, and goals of those who run them.”
AR 15-6 Final Report of the Independent Expert Group tasked with reviewing the detention operations of the Ministry of Defence
“Some researchers have argued that post-traumatic stress disorder does not adequately describe the exact nature of the symptoms resulting from torture and have advocated for the creation of a specific ‘torture syndrome,’ characterized by impaired memory and concentration, sleep disturbances and nightmares, susceptibility to emotional instability (emotional lability), anxiety, depression, and somatic disorders, including gastrointestinal, cardiopulmonary, and sympathetic disorders.” Others have argued that torture survivors suffer from complex post-traumatic stress disorder, or extreme stress disorder, characterized by depression, impaired mood regulation, sexual dysfunction, amnesia, dissociative disorder, depersonalization, feelings of guilt and shame, self-blame, self-harm, suicidal tendencies, excessive fantasies of revenge, a distorted perception of the perpetrator (idealization), social isolation, extreme mistrust, a tendency toward revictimization, hopelessness, psychosomatic disorders, and conversion disorders."
Break Them Down: Systematic Use of Psychological Torture by US Forces
As Jean Améry and Laurence Devillairs stated, we strongly criticize those who choose to forgive or forget. We consider resentment an essential life force. We defend the ethical right to feel resentment and to legitimately aspire to reparation and justice, and, in the absence of these, we even recognize the legitimacy of revenge.
To offer effective psychological defense, we have developed a subjective framework based on four main spheres of psychological violence that can drive an individual to break under torture, or even to suicide or death.
Sphere 1: Cult indoctrination (Robert Jay Lifton, Edgar Schein, Steven Hassan)
Sphere 2: Institutional torture optimized by psychologists (James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, SERE programs, EIT, CIA)
Sphere 3: Military torture (Fay/Jones Report, Schlesinger, Taguba)
Sphere 4: Workplace harassment (Thibaud Brière, Aldo Sterone, Didier Bille)
Through an exploration of intelligence and military literature, we have identified the worldview presented in this literature, based on four postulates:
1 - We are fundamentally egocentric, consciously or unconsciously pursuing only our own self-interest.
Explanation: The fundamental motivation is structural self-preservation, adhering to the principle of seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. Fundamentally egocentric and simultaneously externally determined (Laborit, Morin, etc.), human beings will seek to preserve their biological life but also, and above all, the idealized self-image they have cultivated throughout their existence.
2 - There is no faith to be had in humanity, because everyone is corruptible and everyone has a price.
Explanation: Humans are corruptible, everyone has leverage (MICE). There is no faith to be had in humanity, because everyone is corruptible.
The MICE (Money, Ideology, Coercion, Ego) model activates leverage by exploiting deep-seated motivations: money by creating financial dependence, ideology by mobilizing personal convictions, coercion by instilling fear or threats (for example, by inducing guilt through guilt-inducing language), and ego by appealing to self-esteem or the need for recognition.
3 - Paranoid individuals are the only ones who survive, because when someone over whom they have no leverage is targeted, their abusers do everything to break them, shatter them, and then destroy their life.
Explanation: Paranoia is a survival tool in the objective view of humanity when faced with a superior power dynamic and self-interest.
4 - The best deterrent defense is to immediately attack the aggressor's mental health until it is completely destroyed and their narcissistic self collapses.
Explanation: What is moral is what you find good in hindsight; what is immoral is what you find bad in hindsight. It is impossible to claim that conflict leads to the common good; any gain for one side is a loss for the other.
Professional institutions often protect harassers to preserve their public image, and the justice system often dismisses victims' complaints for lack of evidence.
This framework focuses on extreme and institutionalized forms of psychological violence, where coercion is most intense and, in some cases, officially authorized. It does not claim to cover all forms of psychological violence, particularly those that occur in daily life or within intimate relationships.
During an interview with an intelligence service, there are often two agents. One, experienced, takes notes while seated behind the other in a formal room. Both agents ask questions. Phone geolocation is often used to track the suspect. It's common to feel a sense of guilt at the end of the interview, even if the suspect has done nothing wrong. This feeling is often linked to questions phrased in an implicitly accusatory manner. If the agent senses that the suspect is refusing to divulge certain information, the questions may become more insistent in order to overcome this resistance and obtain an answer. The interview concludes in a non-empathetic, formal manner, often with a cold and directive feel. This type of interview is designed to gather information. The psychology behind the method creates subtle pressure on the suspect to test their reaction, honesty, and cooperation.
Sometimes, psychological violence makes long-term reintegration of the victim into the professional environment impossible.
"Torture is a repressive act of a political, not psychological, nature. Each person reacts to the trauma of torture in a unique way, depending on their personality characteristics and personal history, the specific circumstances of the torture, and the extent to which the social environment offers opportunities for healing. In most cases, the survivor undergoes irreversible changes. Torture often triggers post-traumatic stress disorder with symptoms such as recurring dreams of the traumatic event, anxiety, fear, crying, panic, and feelings of helplessness. Some aspects of identity may be lost, leading to irreversible changes in personality."
Torture and its Consequences: Current Treatment Approaches by Metin Basoglu
We are a firm that aims to provide tools to help individuals trapped in situations of psychological manipulation and coercion. We specialize in workplace suffering and can also offer our expertise in addressing other coercive issues, such as domestic violence.
Our goal is to empower victims, whom we prefer to call survivors, because by remaining alive, they have already demonstrated the courage to confront the psychological suffering of loss of control and the powerlessness acquired during psychological torture—torture that is often far more painful than physical torture.
We therefore offer psychoeducational tools to help our clients become aware of their situation and adopt the best approach based on their deepest needs and desires.
Our expertise in the area of coercion has allowed us to identify three promising strategies in a professional environment:
1. Confrontation, targeting the harasser's narcissistic vulnerabilities.
2. Resistant submission, allowing the individual to maintain a conflict of values while regulating their emotions through strategic coping mechanisms.
3. Neutralized submission, which involves neutralizing the conflict of values and resistance when any opposition could be fatal or dangerous, rather than adopting an inappropriate strategic adaptation.
Of course, the healthiest strategy remains leaving the coercive environment in order to recover emotionally from the situation, reduce hypervigilance, and regain calm and serenity. This also provides the necessary resources to move forward in our clients' lives and professional projects.
Our central objective is to offer pragmatic, in-depth solutions aligned with the scientific literature on the subject of coercion, using various tools, such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). These tools help to address the extreme anxiety triggered by psychological torture, to quickly regain calm, and to prevent the escalation of fear, enabling one to remain unperturbed in the face of the harasser and to strategically apply psychological defenses.
Everyone in a professional environment will, sooner or later, find themselves in a situation of psychological coercion. We are convinced that a thorough understanding of the mechanisms of psychological torture allows for their rapid recognition and the development of effective coping strategies.
It is important to note that, even with an understanding of the foundations of psychological violence, the client can never be completely immune, as violence is, by definition, traumatic. In many cases, escape remains the healthiest solution for regaining one's resources and moving towards a future aligned with one's professional goals.
Nevertheless, understanding the techniques of psychological torture provides intellectual protection. Responding effectively can also be facilitated by assertiveness and setting boundaries. This is a central lesson in our theoretical model, which is not binary but flexible, functioning as a continuum of psychological violence and adaptation to extreme situations.
For example, apathy and extreme resistance are effective defenses, and emotion regulation allows one to appear cold and impassive in the face of a harasser who seeks to provoke their target in order to harm them.
We thus offer an adaptive psychological armor, where our clients can access the resources they need at the most opportune moment, according to their unique and subjective situation.