Conformity and Tyranny: Insights from Historical Tragedies and Psychological Experiments

In an evening on June 1992 at a village named Vachathi located Dharmapuri district of Tamilnadu , around 269 officials, including 155 forest personnel, 108 policemen, and 6 revenue officials raided the village, without any prior warning. In the pretext of conducting a search operation of smuggler Veerappan, they gathered all the villagers under a tree. Not knowing the real intentions of the officials, the villagers cooperated with them. But the officials brutally tortured around 100 men from the village and gang-raped around 18 women. This raid continued for around two days and the entire hamlet was destroyed.

Despite being trained in an ethical way in their training phase those officers did heinous, unlawful and unethical things. What made those bureaucrats who were supposed to make the lives of those people better to do this?

Conformity, often criticized for its role in major human atrocities and the "crimes of obedience," involves adjusting one's thoughts, behaviors, or actions to align with group norms or authority figures. This phenomenon has been extensively studied, notably through Milgram's Obedience to Authority research and Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment, shaping the understanding of human nature and conformity in society.

Stanley Milgram's Obedience to Authority experiments, conducted in the early 1960s, aimed to investigate the extent to which individuals would comply with authority figures even if it meant administering increasingly severe electric shocks to another person. Participants were instructed to deliver shocks to a "learner" (an actor) whenever they answered questions incorrectly, with the shock intensity supposedly increasing with each mistake. The shocking findings revealed that a significant portion of participants were willing to administer what they believed to be life-threatening shocks simply because an authority figure, the experimenter, urged them to do so, illustrating the disturbing power of obedience to authority.

Philip Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted in 1971, delved into the psychological effects of perceived power and authority within a simulated prison environment. Volunteer participants were randomly assigned to play roles of either prisoners or guards in a mock prison. The guards were given no specific instructions on how to exert their authority, but within a short period, they began displaying oppressive and abusive behavior towards the prisoners. The experiment was halted after just six days due to the alarming intensity of psychological distress and the abusive dynamics that emerged, highlighting how individuals placed in positions of authority can quickly exhibit cruel behavior even in a controlled setting.

Milgram's studies involved participants administering increasingly intense shocks to another person under the guise of a memory experiment, revealing a high degree of compliance with authority. Zimbardo's experiment explored destructive behavior in a simulated prison environment, demonstrating the powerful impact of roles and authority on human behavior.

Another example is Adolf Eichmann, a chief organizer of the Holocaust who is often touted as the exemplar of a bland bureaucrat following orders. But historical texts show he was highly creative, elaborating many of the practical details of the "final solution" himself. What's more, Eichmann expressed no regret during his trial, justifying his decision to send millions of Jews and others to their deaths because he believed it would build a better Germany.

However, recent perspectives question the interpretation of these studies. They argue that conformity is not a natural inclination, and the banality of evil thesis oversimplifies the complex motivations behind harmful actions. The argument goes beyond blind conformity, suggesting that individuals engaged in harmful actions are not passive automatons but actively identify with authority figures and their prescribed roles.

It's evident that tyranny emerges not from blind conformity but from active identification with authorities advocating harmful acts. Understanding the processes of authority advocacy and follower identification is crucial. Harmful acts are often justified as constructive or in service of a greater cause, highlighting the role of framing and context in promoting harmful behavior.

Ultimately, this perspective underscores that accountability should be placed on individuals who actively identify with harmful roles and acts, challenging the notion that they are helpless or ignorant in the perpetration of harm.

Source:

1. Contesting the ‘‘Nature’’ Of Conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s Studies Really Show essay by S. Alexander Haslam, Stephen D. Reicher

2. "Vachathi incident" in Wikipedia