NEW YORK ACADEMY OF MEDICINE, SECTION OF NEUROLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY, AND NEWYORK NEUROLOGICAL SOCIETYJohn McDowell McKinney, M.D., Chairman, Section of Neurology and Psychiatry, PresidingJoint Meeting, Nov. 13, 1956

Panel Discussion on Communist Methods of

interrogation and indoctrinationModerator: Harold G. Wolff, M.D.Members of the Panel : Lawrence E. Hinkle, Jr.,

M.D. ; Albert D. Biderman ; Robert J. Lifton,M.D. ; Adolf A. Berle Jr., LL.B. and LL.D.Dr. Harold G. Wolff : The Communists are

skilled in the extraction of information fromprisoners and in making prisoners do their bid¬ding. It has appeared that they can force men

to confess to crimes which have not been com¬

mitted and then apparently to believe in the truthof their confessions and express sympathy andgratitude toward those who have imprisoned them.

Many have found it hard to understand that theCommunists do not possess new and remarkabletechniques of psychological manipulation. Somehave compared the confessions of such men as

Cardinal Mindszenty and William Otis and theunusual behavior of the old Bolshevik purge trialsin the 30's and have seen an alarming parallel.These prisoners were men of intelligence, ability,and strength of character. They had every reason

to oppose their captors. Their confessions were

palpably untrue. Such behavior is, if anything,more difficult to explain than that of some of our

prisoners of war in Korea.The techniques used by the Communists have

been the subject of speculation. A number oftheories about them have been advanced, most ofthem suggesting that these techniques have beenbased upon some modification of the conditionedreflex techniques of Professor Pavlov, the Russianphysiologist.

The term "brainwashing," originated by Mr.Ed Hunter, who interviewed Chinese refugees inHong Kong, has caught the public fancy and hasgained wide acceptance. Various authors have at¬tempted to provide a scientific definition for thisterm. This has had the effect of confirming thegeneral impression that brainwashing is an esoterictechnique for the manipulation of human behaviordesigned by scientific investigators on the basis oflaboratory experiments and controlled observationsand producing highly predictable results.

Many of the public speculations about brain¬washing are not supported by the available evi-

dence. However, the Communists do make an

orderly attempt to obtain information from theirprisoners and to convert their prisoners to formsof behavior and belief acceptable to their captors.They have had some success in their efforts, andthis success has had a great deal of propagandavalue for them.

Methods Used by Communist State Policein the Interrogation and Indoctrination ofEnemies of the State. Dr. Lawrence E.Hinkle Jr.The methods of interrogation and indoctrination

utilized in Communist countries and dealing withpersons regarded as "enemies of the state" havebeen studied, making use of openly available infor¬mation, as well as information obtained with theassistance of the U. S. Department of Defense.

The evidence from every source has been con¬

sistent with that from the others and provides a

basis for confidence in the validity of the state¬ments that are made in this report and the con¬

clusions that have been drawn from them, whichmay be summarized thus :

1. The interrogation methods used by the state

police in Communist countries are elaborations andrefinements of police practices, many of whichwere known and used before the Russian Com¬munist Revolution.

2. The principles and practices used by the Com¬munist state police in the development of suspects,the accumulation of evidence, and the carryingout of arrest, detention, interrogation, trial, andpunishment are known. The effects of these uponprisoners are known also.

3. The "confessions" obtained by Communiststate police are readily understandable as resultsof the methods used.

4. Communist methods of indoctrinating prison¬ers of war were developed by the Russians andsubsequently refined by the Chinese. Thesemethods and their effects are known also.

5. Chinese methods of dealing with politicalprisoners and "enemies of the state" were adaptedfrom those of the Russians.

6. The intensive indoctrination of political pris¬oners is a practice primarily used by the Chinese

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

Communists. The methods used in this indoctrina¬tion are known, and their effects are understand¬able.

Discussion

Dr. Wolff : What is accidental in this process,and what is method and design? Have you beenable to show that the many things we hear aboutare part of a method, or are they an aspect ofindividual frustration or lack of skill? Would youlike to comment on what is method and what isaccident, Dr. Hinkle?

Dr. Hinkle: Sometimes it is difficult to tellthese things apart. People who have seen theprocess of keeping a prisoner under surveillancefor several months and letting him see his friendsand associates seized have thought of this as adiabolical method of creating suspense, but thereis much to indicate that it is a result of clumsypolice methods. Much of the haphazard brutalityone runs into likewise seems to be the result ofenthusiasm for their work on the part of thepolice officers. We are inclined to think thatsometimes things which at first seemed purposelycontrived were accidental.

Dr. Wolff : What are the vulnerabilities of theinterrogator? Is he immune to the relationship,or is he likely to become involved with the pris¬oner?

Dr. Hinkle: He is not immune at all. The man

is a young police officer; he is more or less judgedby the effectiveness with which he produces hisprotocols, and he is expected to produce them ina few months. He has many vulnerabilities ; if hebecomes emotionally involved with a prisoner,becomes angry and beats him, he can get intotrouble with the authorities. He may developsympathy for the prisoner and have trouble con¬vincing him. If he cannot come up with a satis¬factory protocol, he will probably be replaced byanother man.

Dr. Wolff : Do many persons who participatein these relationships actually get to the pointwhere they are suitable for public trial?

Dr. Hinkle: No, public trial is the extremeexception. A very small minority of prisonersare ever brought to public trial.

Dr. Wolff: Would 10% to 15% come to trial?Dr. Hinkle : Only 1% to 2%.Mr. Biderman : You raised the question, Dr.

Wolff, as to just how much was method and howmuch was madness, and I wonder if what Dr.Hinkle was stating amounted to saying that a lotof it was neither method nor madness, but merelyS. O. P.—doing things a certain way because thatis the only way they know how to do them.

Dr. Wolff: What does S. O. P. mean?Dr. Hinkle: S. O. P. is "standard operating

procedure," a term used by the military. The

police procedure is not written out, so far as I can

tell, but it is customary; so in effect it is S. O. P.Sometimes the madness is the result of the attemptof rather limited men to apply the standardizedprocedures to special cases.

Dr. Wolff : Physical violence has no place inthis system as a whole, has it?

Dr. Hinkle: No, sir. It does occur when an

interrogator becomes frustrated, and when there isa breakdown in police discipline; but in generalit is not used among the Russians and the Chinese.

Dr. Lifton : My impression is that the devotionof the reformers to Communist ideology can makea great deal of difference in the thought reformor confession-extraction process, and that a groupof men thoroughly convinced and attached to a

set of principles can be rather formidable in put¬ting them forward. What sort of difference, ifany, have you noticed between the effectivenessof methods used during the pre-Communist periodand during the post-Revolutionary period inRussia?

Dr. Hinkle: Both in Russia and in China manyof the police officers have what amounts to an

idealistic attachment to Communism, which I mustsay is sometimes most attractive to prisoners. Theirdedication to their "ideals" may be greatly influen¬tial in getting the prisoner to accept their sug¬gestions.

Dr. Wolff : Such reactions would occur notonly in native Communists but also in foreignnon-Communists ?

Dr. Hinkle: Yes. A man who has a belief towhich he adheres very strongly not infrequentlycan overwhelm a man who is without strong con¬victions.

Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confes¬sions from Air Force Prisoners of War.Albert D. Biderman (by invitation), MaxwellAir Force Base, Montgomery, Ala.

About one-half of the 235 Air Force personnelwho were repatriated by the Chinese Communistsreport attempts to elicit false confessions fromthem. Measures used to make them comply withthese demands did not differ greatly from methodsused in gaining compliance for other objectives,e. g., in interrogations for factual intelligence.This suggests a distinction between methods usedto render prisoners complaint—to overcome re¬sistance— and those used to shape compliance intothe very specific forms of "confessor" behaviorwhich the Communists attempt to achieve.

Methods of making prisoners compliant usedagainst Air Force prisoners by the Chinese Com¬munists were similar to methods they are reportedto have used against other prisoners and to methodsemployed in other Communist states. These

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

methods included nothing which was not commonlypracticed by police and intelligence interrogatorsof other times and places, where restraints pre¬cluding the use of such measures were not in force.An analysis of these measures indicates probablepsychological and physiological effects sufficientto account for the limited degree of success whichthe Communists achieved. Physical violence was

not a necessary nor particularly effective methodof inducing compliance. The Chinese Communistsattempted to shape prisoners' compliance to con¬

form with an idealogical conception of how a

"repentant American war criminal" would behave.These attempts to shape compliance comprised a

difficult and complex teaching problem. It was

made difficult and complex by (1) the elaborate¬ness of the behavior which was sought, (2) ir¬rational aspects of the Communist system, whichrequired the interrogator to "teach" without mak¬ing his lessons explicit, and (3) the behaviorssought being extremely alien and offensive to theprisoners.

Discussion

Dr. Wolff: I should like to ask something con¬

nected with your opening remarks. You spoke ofthe Air Force personnel and said that about one-

half were exposed to these methods. Will you saysomething about the variations and degrees ofpressure?

Mr. Biderman : With the small number ofpeople we had involved, the tremendous variationin behavior, and the different kinds of things thathappened to them, it is possible to account for eachand every one of our cases in terms of situationaldeterminants. There are enough data to permitone to say that this could have been why this per¬son did so and so and others did not, for in no

case did we have identical situations. Anotherthing I tried to stress is that those techniques usedagainst a man which from a moral standpointwould be most mitigating—would "explain" hisbehavior best in a moral sense—are not those whichfrom the scientific point of view are most likelyto induce abnormal behavior. So, for example, inthis instance physical violence is that treatmentwhich we are most likely to accept as excusingextreme behavior ; but, so far as our Korean cases

were concerned, that was the treatment most likelyto produce resistance, or, to be cautious, I wouldsay, most frequently associated with resistance.

Dr. Wolff: Would you like to suggest thatthere are some people who can be exposed to themost extreme measures and yet remain defiant ?

Mr. Biderman: If I had not spoken so slowly,as an effect of long residence in the South, Imight have got to the other parts in the paperwhich would have brought out some of the diffi-

culties in answering the kind of question you raise.In order to be truthful, we have to say that everyperson of those involved in an intensive attemptto elicit a false confession complied to some ex¬

tent, and we have to say that every one of thoseinvolved resisted, so that in each and every case

the behavior at some point involved a mixture ofthe two, of compliance and resistance. There re¬

mains a tremendous range of behavior which oc¬

curred between the ideal standards of resistancewhich we would like our people to uphold and thebehavior that the Communists sought to achieve.

Dr. Hinkle: We all have in mind the storiesof the "21 who stayed behind" with the Com¬munists. Did you happen to run across any Com¬munist sympathizers in this group?

Mr. Biderman : I have no first-hand knowledgeof such cases.

Dr. Wolff : Dr. Hinkle, how about answeringyour own question?

Dr. Hinkle : I think there is information aboutthis. Most of these men knew little or nothingabout Communism and cared less. Most of thesemen had some reason to believe that because oftheir behavior in the prison camp it would be saferfor them to stay with the Communists. I do believethat there were not more than a very few Com¬munist sympathizers among them.

Dr. Wolff : Do you think they were exposedto the heavy pressures of the procedures we are

talking about?Dr. Hinkle: I think some received very little

indoctrination, and some had a great deal ; thereaction was quite variable.

Dr. Wolff: A major purpose of these propa¬ganda and indoctrination efforts was to neutralizethe large population of prisoners so that fewermen were necessary to guard them and more willbe free to fight. This is an effective way ofneutralizing such a large population of prisoners.

Dr. Lifton : The relative emphasis with thisparticular group of Air Force people is on con¬

fession-extraction rather than on reform. Did thisconcentration add to the effectiveness in extract¬ing confessions?

Mr. Biderman : I said half our people had some

experience with attempts to elicit false confessions.A much smaller number encountered the real "all-out" attempts which I spoke of, and this would bein the neighborhood of 65. Regardless of what theCommunists did, politics and proselytizing were

never completely absent, so that it is always verydifficult to determine from the recollections of a

person the extent to which his interrogators or hiscaptors had this as a major objective; but cer¬

tainly it was subordinated, as all other things were

subordinated in these cases, where getting a con¬

fession was an exremely important propagandaobject. There was great stress on this, and the

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

entire treatment of a man was organized aroundthis objective.

Thought Reform of Western Civilians inChinese Communist Prisons. Dr. Robert J.Lifton (by invitation), Boston.The "thought reform" (or "brainwashing")

experiences of 25 European and Americancivilians in Chinese Communist prisons werestudied through intensive individual interviewsconducted in the British Crown Colony of HongKong during 17 months of psychiatric research.A composite picture from these interviews revealsa "thought reform" process with the followingstages :

1. The emotional assaults—the initial periodof imprisonment, consisting of intensive ac¬

cusatory interrogations, group denunciation, de¬mand for confession, and additional physical andemotional pressures. This results in the annihila¬tion of the prisoner's feelings of inner identity,the stimulation within him of a nonspecific senseof guilt, and the projection of the prisoner intototal conflict with an inflexible environment.

2. "Leniency"—the sudden shift to apparentkindness, with improvement in attitudes of fellowprisoners and captors and in general living condi¬tions. This allows the prisoner an adaptationalsolution and tends to enlist his aid in his ownconfession and "reform."

3. Confession—the development of the prisoner'sconfession, and its progression into a more specificform through the guilty reinterpretation of pastevents, distortions, exaggerations, and elaborationof fantasy. The psychological stages here are theconfession compulsion, the channeling of guilt intoa relationship to specific events, and the coerciveconfabulation, or final confession.

4. Reeducation—the group-study process, involv¬ing both the detailed repetitive learning ofCommunist doctrine and personal criticism, self-criticism, confession, and analysis of individualresistances to the Communist point of view. Thereis a broadening of guilt to include the prisoner'sentire life pattern; adaptational rewards—intimategroup living, self-surrender, personal catharsis,and the "moral crusade" ; "working through"—depth interpretations; overcoming of resistances,and the final shift in identity and the receding ofreality in the acceptance of the Communist worldview.

The process combines techniques found in hyp¬nosis, induced religious conversion, and a coerciveform of psychotherapy. It makes use, to an ex¬treme degree, of psychological forces encounteredin all cultures.

Dr. Wolff: This is sufficiently different, par¬ticularly in regard to the use of the group and

pressures causing change, to raise the question,What is there in the Chinese culture, or procedure,of which this is a part? Have you a better under¬standing of the methods from what you knowabout Chinese practices, education, and organiza¬tion of schools?

Dr. Lifton : This is a very important questionto answer, and there is a great deal of disagree¬ment in this general area. I believe that the maindistinction in Chinese Communist methods, as op¬posed to all other indoctrination methods, is theemphasis upon reeducation. Where does this re¬education emphasis come from in Chinese culture?I believe—and people who know more aboutChinese culture than I do have reinforced thisidea—that this is a remnant of the Confucianinfluence in Chinese culture, which teaches thatmen can and should be reformed, and that self-cultivation is a very important element in thedevelopment of the ethical man. I think it is theintention of the Chinese Communists to build theirown version of the ethical man on this theme.Another impression I have is that the Chinesepossess unusual skill in the conduct and manipula¬tion of human relationships. They have alwaysplaced great emphasis upon relationships betweenpeople, rather than upon those with a supernaturalbeing or upon technological developments. In thissense I feel that thought reform is the perversionof a cultural genius.

Dr. Hinkle: I should like to ask whether Dr.Lifton thinks the insistence on writing and re¬writing, which is somewhat different from theRussian method, is also a part of the outgrowthof the Chinese cultural pattern.

Dr. Lifton : Yes, I should think it has to dowith the repetition of all Chinese teaching.

Mr. Biderman : I wonder if Dr. Lifton has anyideas as to why the group kind of tactics was sounsuccessful when it was attempted against mili¬tary personnel.

Dr. Wolff: Is that true?Dr. Hinkle: Yes.Dr. Lifton: The question depends upon an

assumption. I believe that the techniques wereactually fairly successful in breaking down re¬sistance and in exerting control over Americanmilitary personnel, but were quite unsuccessful inconverting them to Communism. The Group proc¬ess with Western civilians had a great deal morepower. It was conducted much more intensively,and the Western civilians involved were eachplaced among a group of Chinese prisoners, ratherthan with their peers. In addition, these Westernerswere much more involved in Chinese culture thanwere the American prisoners of war. Many ofthem had learned to love China, and if they couldbe made to believe that what the Communists weredoing was somehow necessary for China, this

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

would be a very powerful emotional pressure.Many of these people actually wept at leavingChina, even after their harrowing ordeal.

Dr. Wolff: Some of them were exposed to theprocess for four and a half years.

I have a question from the floor : There are

obvious propaganda successes gained from the in¬tensive efforts of the Chinese with such Americansas Colonel Schwäble, Colonel Arnold and his crew,the 21 turncoats, and those 4 young intellectualswho emerged brainwashed and highly vocal. Whatare your thoughts, Dr. Lifton, on the fact thatno American civilian was given a public trial, nor

was anything but the merest detail of his convic¬tion made public, either to the outside world orfor internal consumption within China?

Dr. Lifton : I cannot answer that questiondefinitively ; but there were very few trials duringthe first few years that this process was used. Inmore recent years there have been some trials, anda few public trials; but they were not as widelypublicized as the militar}- ones. Why this was so,I do not know.

Dr. Wolff : Again we must remember that onlya small percentage of any prisoner population haspredictable responses in a trial situation. Wouldyou agree, Dr. Hinkle?

Dr. Hinkle: The propaganda value of a trialis scarcely worth the trouble and the potentialhazards in most cases.

Dr. Wolff: Dr. Berle, it is obvious that all ofthis must have grown in a certain kind of soil,and we will very much depend on you to give usthe background of these procedures.Legal Background of Communist Methods of

Interrogation and Indoctrination. Adolf A.Berle Jr., LL.B. and LL.D. (by invitation).Communist methods of interrogation and trial

of accused may possibly have changed during thepast six months. As part of the de-Stalinizationprogram, announcement was made, first, thatSoviet prosecutors must prove their case againstan accused; second, that confessions of prisonersare not conclusive as evidence of guilt ; third, thata "free defense" or its equivalent will be per¬mitted. Evidence is not yet available whether or

how the announced policy is carried into practice.Something like it was allowed in the trial of thePoles accused in connection with the Poznandemonstration last June, but this may have beendue to special circumstances rather than to changedpractice. Observations hereafter made are sub¬ject to the proviso that a change in the system maybe in process. In making them, the effect of therecent announced change is not considered.

Communist handling of persons accused of anyoffense differs radically from Western concepts.Two roots are important.

First, under both Leninist and Stalinist doc¬trine, trial of an accused is essentially a political,not a judicial, matter. Opposition to the Com¬munist State (or, outside the Communist State,to the Communist Revolution) is consideredcriminal whether or not the opponent is within or

without the borders of the Communist State. Byconsequence, prisoners of war are similar topolitical prisoners.

The assumed ends of the Soviet state in anygiven legal proceeding are, first, the enforcementand forwarding of the socialist policy involved ;second, conversion or conscription of the indi¬viduals involved into a frame of mind and norms

of activity useful to the Revolution. (In Soviettheory, the State is the organization of the Revo¬lution ; for "Revolution" we can hereafter use theword "State" wherever the Communist Revolutionhas seized the government.) The whole process,from beginning to end, is designed to strengthenand reenforce the Communist Revolution—that is,the State, and to give effect to its policies andplans.

In 1937, Vyshinsky, whose early career was as

prosecutor and legal theorist, defined the basis ofCommunist law as "awareness of the necessityto proceed in a manner required by the socialistrevolution and the socialist State of workers andpeasants (Gsovski, V. : Social Civil Law, AnnArbor, Mich., University of Michigan Press, 1948,Vol. I, p. 160), and Communist jurists said quitefrankly that law must be guided by "revolutionaryexpediency, which helps us in our work of re¬

constructing society along socialist lines. Theproblem of expediency should predominate over

the form of law" ( Gsovski, V. : Social Civil Law.Ann Arbor, Mich., Lmiversity of Michigan Press,1948, Vol. I, p. 162). As this dogma was publishedin Izvcstiia, Nov. 24, 1925, it had almost the effectof an official decree.

In summary, as reported in 1940 by S. A.Golnnskii and M. S. Strogovich to the SovietInstitute of Law and the U. S. S. R. Academy ofScience, the "norms of socialist law" are primarilyimportant as "powerful means of building Social¬ism and Communism" (Soviet Legal Philosophy,translated by Hugh W. Babb, Cambridge, Mass.,Harvard University Press, 1951, p. 424). Pro¬cedure and dealings with the accused are basedwholly on that premise.

Article 9 of the 1926 Soviet Criminal Codestated the purpose as follows: "(a) to preventcommission of future crimes by the same offender,(6) to influence other unstable members of society,and (c) to adapt the offenders to the conditionsof the community life in the toilers' State.

. . .The question of retaliation or punishment does notarise" ( Schlesinger, R. : Soviet Legal Theory, NewYork, Oxford University Press, 1945, p. 106). The

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

same writer also quotes Vyshinsky as saying (pp.200 and 201) that "revolutionary legality" con¬

tains oppressive elements. . .

but also educationalelements which are lacking in bourgeois legalityand which create a new discipline. ... It is notnegative, but also aims to instill socialist habits."The accused, in a proceeding which is thought toaffect the stability of the State, is thus one ofthe dramatis persona;. His claims are recognizedor not depending on whether their recognition willin the view of the Court contribute to the effective¬ness of existing Communist policy.

The second root long antedates the CommunistRevolution and is probably derived from Greek-Catholic practice in certain Slavic regions. Thelate Anne O'Hare McCormick, discussing Sovietprocedure in extracting confessions from prisoners,observed to me that in the Slavic Balkans and inSouth Russia the Greek-Orthodox Catholic prac¬tice of confession differed somewhat from ourmore familiar Roman Catholic practice. Thepenitent made his confession to the "pope" or

priest, in a sort of running conversation. Thepriest felt quite justified in questioning him to dis¬cover whether he had told all the truth, and fre¬quently sent him home, admonishing him to searchhis conscience and memory and to return to makefuller accounting. When the priest was satisfiedthat he had a fair or adequate disclosure, he im¬posed penance and gave absolution. It is difficultnot to believe that this practice influenced Com¬munist administrative practice leading up to trial.

Apparently, some Communist jurists think so.E. P. Pashukanis considered that criminal proceed¬ings included the ideological motive of purificationand redemption, "thereby to make out of criminallaw—built on the principles of private vengeance—a more efficient means of maintaining social dis¬cipline [that is to say, class dominance]," and heattributed the origin of the idea to the Byzantinepriesthood (Soviet Legal Philosophy, translatedby Hugh W. Babb, Cambridge, Mass., HarvardUniversity Press, 1951, p. 211). "Crime andpunishment

. . .

acquire their juridic nature on thebasis of the redemption arrangement. Preciselyas this form is preserved, so is the class struggleaccomplished through law" (Soviet Legal Philos¬ophy, translated by Hugh W. Babb, Cambridge,Mass., Harvard University Press, 1951, p. 214).I do not see that Vyshinsky discredited this theoryin his criticism of Pashukanis in 1938. (In afamous Communist Party conference, in 1938,Vyshinsky, now dominant in the Stalinist hier¬archy, attacked Pashukanis for "deviation" in a

number of respects. Particularly, he repudiatedthe theory that an accused who had committed acrime could "bargain" with the State to reach an

arrangement for compensation or expiation. Buthe did not attack the idea that the accused could

attain a kind of "redemption" by being made use¬ful to Socialist policy.)

If these two principles are combined, I suggestthat the handling of prisoners or accused in theCommunist system becomes both logical and clear,however distasteful to Western concept. The ob¬ject is not to shield or guard the individual (savefor the purpose of extracting useful information),or even to deal with the exact facts leading to hisaccusation. Rather, the object is to take the cir¬cumstances, with the individual as part of them,and so handle them that the Communist State andits then prevailing policy will be strengthened andforwarded. It would serve no purpose whateverin the resulting political process of a court trial,to give the accused an opportunity to prove thatthe facts stated by the State were wrong, that a

mistake had been committed, and that he ought tobe discharged. This would tend to discredit theprosecutor who presented the case, the police or

administrative officiais who had worked up thefacts, and the entire proceeding from beginning toend, unless, of course, Communist policy at themoment required that the procuracy or the Courtbe disciplined, weakened, or exposed, which oc¬casionally, though rarely, happens. If it isascertained that no profit can be had from a trial,the obvious solution is simply to release the pris¬oner, and let it go at that. Professor Gsovskiobserved that the law was an instrument of ruler-ship, placed not above the government but in itshands, as a tool in creating a new social order(Gsovski, V.: Social Civil Law, Ann Arbor,Mich., University of Michigan Press, 1948. Vol. 1,p. 188).

So far as the individual is concerned, the busi¬ness of the revolutionary government is to bringhim into its operative apparatus, and to eliminatethose that cannot be made useful to the systemin some way. Consequently, the handling of anindividual from the time he is accused to the timehe is ultimately liquidated, punished, or releasedis dictated by the design either to make him usefulwithin the system or to use him as an exampleto make others more useful. He is, therefore,examined repeatedly until he is drained dry of allinformation, not only about himself and his acts,but about every possible associate and every pos¬sible bearing which the circumstances may haveon other situations. Thereafter attempt is madeto require him to realize, or at any rate acknowl¬edge, that he has contravened the policy or opposedthe operation of the State, and that he erred indoing so, and to make him a more or less reliableagent of Communist society thereafter. For trialpurposes, he is under pressure to frame his state¬ment in such fashion that it will have maximumpersuasive force for others.

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

Trial itself is little more than a drama playedto the climax. The Soviet judges may see pos¬sibilities in the situation which the police ad¬ministrators and prosecutors have missed; in anycase, they play a vital part in the drama in sum¬

ming up against the accused, and they have somediscretion in pronouncing sentence. In certaincategories, of course, including crimes more

specifically attacking the State, there is a widesystem of courts-martial which may try civilians,as well as military personnel. These crimesspecifically include espionage, treason, subversion,and the like. A similar system (where it is nota part of the court-martial system) extends toprison camps of all kinds, including prisoners ofwar camps. Of interest is the fact that thesecourts, though "martial," are not created by or

responsible to the Army; they are a separatebranch of the Soviet court system, directed by theU. S. S. R. Supreme Court. Their mandate, how¬ever, seems to be the same as in the case ofother courts (Gsovski, V.: Social Civil Law, Vol.I, pp. 841-842).

The reader will have noticed many points ofsimilarity between the Soviet system and theprocedure in the 15th and 16th centuries of thecourts of the Inquisition (Lea, H. C. : History ofthe Spanish Inquisition of the Middle Ages, NewYork, S. A. Russell). Even the transcript of theinterrogation of an accused under torture closelyapproximates the accounts of interrogations ofpolitical prisoners or prisoners of war under Com¬munist procedure. Inquisitorial courts also con¬sidered themselves obliged to endeavor to assurethe accused's "conversion," though in doctrine theywere dealing with the state of his soul ratherthan with his terrestrial body and activities. Underthe Inquisition, however, the accused had a residualright, which finds no counterpart, so far as I know,in Communist doctrine. He had an absolute privi¬lege, frequently well guarded, to seek salvationby abjuring error, confessing his sins, becomingreconciled with the Church, with access to themercy of God. Apparently, all that an accusedunder the Communist system can do is to seekto convince the police that he can become usefulin some fashion (perhaps by being condemned)to the State and its revolutionary purposes. Anydealing he may have (if it can so be described)with the police and administrative authority priorto trial or with his judges in court really rep¬resents little more than an endeavor to show thatleniency to him in the frame of mind which hehas attained will be more useful than his deathor other punishment. To give him opportunity fora drama of self-justification on the eve of con¬demnation would be merely absurd.

This statement is made subject to the preliminary'reservation noted above. At the trial of the

Poznan demonstrators they were permitted justthis opportunity for defense, and for justification.But it is not clear whether this was done becauseof the new doctrine of rights of the accused, or

because in the explosive condition of Polish publicopinion such a policy appeared politically useful.

Essentially, the Communist legal system in thisrespect approximates the situation in other legalsystems in states where Church and state are

combined, and where the law and procedures are

assimilated to and governed by ecclesiastical andreligious practice. The difference lies in the factthat the Communist system, being materialist, dis¬cards any external or transcendental criteria;doctrine is made by the Communist Party, ofwhich the State is an expression; there can be,therefore, no principle, let alone law, superior toit. Police, administrative officials, and courts are

obliged to adapt the "law" (meaning thereby de¬crees and regulations, and so forth) to this doc¬trine, and to handle the accused accordingly. (Thisis what the phrase "revolutionary legality" means.

Bukharin thought "revolutionary legality" meant

an end to any arbitrary administration ; otherswhose views prevailed [Bukharin was later exe¬cuted for treason] believed that the problem ofexpediency in conducting the revolution mustalways predominate over the form of law. Vyshin-sky, in 1935, insisted that the formal commands oflaw must always be subordinated to those ofCommunist Party policy [Gsovski, pp. 162-163],and legal practice seems to have followed thisdictate.) Leaving out the transcendental element,the Communist legal system is probably merely a

new version of the practice prevailing in trial ofcrimes against the state under the ByzantineEmpire (in which the Emperor was also dominantin the Church) and of the actual, though lessrationalized, practice in many political cases underthe Czarist Empire (Description of the Russianimperial procedure may be found in the auto¬

biography of Prince Kropotkin [himself a politicalprisoner in Czarist Russia]).

The foregoing also accounts for the process ofindoctrination applied, more or less systematically,"to anyone who has been outside the sweep of thetotalitarian Communist State. Great units of theSoviet army, returning from conquest of EastGermany and Mid-Europe, when they returnedto Russia, were not at once demobilized. They were

sent to special camps for "reindoctrination." Theyhad lived outside the Communist-dominated com¬

plex ; thej' had had contact with and had actedin the non-Communist West; they were, there¬fore, by that much less reliable as instruments inforwarding the interests and policies of the SovietState ; they must, therefore, be isolated for a timeand instructed intellectually and emotionally beforeresuming life within Communist society.

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

Though I yield to Prof. Harold Wolff and toDr. Lawrence Hinkle on this point, my informa¬tion is such that the legal doctrine summarizedabove is applied to prisoners of war, as also topolitical prisoners in Soviet concentration camps.In our Western system, prisoners of war are lockedup merely to prevent them from further fighting.Under the Communist system, prisoners of warconstitute a body of persons criminal by hypothesisbecause they have fought against the Revolution.Some, if not all, may be made useful to the State(within Communist countries) or to the Revolution(if they find their way home). Such uses willvary. From some, useful military information canbe obtained. Others may be utilized to broadcastpropaganda. Still others may be induced to "con¬fess" or otherwise manufacture evidence in supportof some political campaign (for instance, suchevidence was manufactured to buttress the falsecharge that Americans were using "germ warfare"in the Korean conflict. Attempt may be made toconvert some prisoners into Communist agents,then to be released for work in their own countries.Merely releasing prisoners of war if they arestill opponents would, under Communist doctrine,be an act of stupidity—unless, of course, some

political or diplomatic advantage is thereby secured.Ideally, all of them should be converted intoactive instruments of the Revolution and then putto work in some fashion. (The Communist doc¬trine that opposition is itself a crime also antedatesthe Revolution. Genghis Khan promulgated thedoctrine that God had given him the earth andany opposition to him was ipso facto violation ofGod's will. His Mongolian armies overran Russiaabout 1240, and, in the form of the "GoldenHordes," they continued as rulers of Russia untiluntil about 1480. Their khans carried forward thedoctrine. Its convenience to a dictatorial govern¬ment is obvious. The extent of Tartar influenceon Russian thought and practice is matter ofdispute, but it is difficult to believe (Lenin hadTartar blood) that it does not enter as an ap¬preciable element into Russian folkways underCommunist, as well as under preceding, systems.)

Here, another ancient conception seems toemerge. Though opposition to the Revolution is acrime in itself, the crime is mitigated where theopponent has had no real opportunity to under¬stand the Communist ideal. On the other hand,if the opponent has been in a Communist society,especially if he has been himself a Communist buthas deviated or defected, then he is in the positionof a man who has consciously chosen to be, inthat ideology, a "criminal" or recusant. He is,therefore, less likely to be or become a trust¬worthy instrument or supported of the State or

(outside Communist states) of the Revolution.Absent unusual circumstances, he had best be

liquidated—well, Christians and Mohammedansalike have made the distinction between the paganunconverted and the heretic.

Two observations remain to be made.The first is that a large area of the Soviet

legal system is "administered," meaning it never

gets into courts at all. (Gsovski,1 pp. 238-245. Inthese cases there is no established method ofprocedure; sentence may be for confinement to a

labor camp up to five years, exile to a particularlocality, or banishment. Administrative authoritiesmay make an arrest on any criminal charge,convert that charge into a charge under theirjurisdiction, and sentence the accused without hisever appearing before a court at all. This is thejurisdiction of the OGPU, CHEKA, NKVD,MVD [all signifying secret police], administeredby the secretary of interior.) Since there is no

distinction between public and private interests,the administrative authority (which also has a

limited right to imprison) leaves the individualabout where he would be if in our system thelocal police chief or the local revenue collectorcould settle all matters. Indeed, in these mattersthe administration bears some analogy to procedurein our Internal Revenue system—if you eliminatethe crucial difference that here a tax payer can

appeal to the courts against the collector's finding,whereas under the Soviet "administrative" penalsystem he cannot. In both cases the administrativeofficials observe the individual's conduct, carryout an investigation, examine into his affairs, makeup their minds preliminarily, call in the individualand demand information from him, and maketheir decision.

With or without access to a court, the powerof the police and prosecuting authorities over theaccused is usually determinative. In "RecollectedCases" (Konstantinovsky, . .: Soviet Law inAction : The Recollected Cases of a Soviet Lawyer,translated by H. J. Berman, Cambridge, Mass.,Harvard University Press, 1953, p. 3 especially)conviction of one man who appeared innocent ofthe crime alleged was obtained because a scapegoatwas needed to calm popular, indignation againsta shortage of bread; another justified complaintwas dismissed because the complainant was

daughter of a White Guard officer. Both cases

were later reopened by the courts because theadvocate persuaded the prosecuting officers thatthe action taken did not tend to assist the Socialistfabric. In matters under administrative jurisdic¬tion persuading the police and prosecutor appearsto be the only remedy.

The foregoing observations state the declaredtheory. In practice there are, unquestionably,human lapses in the direction of kindness, com¬

passion, and personal consideration. These, how¬ever, entail risk. Prosecuting officers and police

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from

are subject to check and control ; special pro¬ceedings are provided for disciplining judges whoseofficial acts fail (because of undue leniency,severity, or otherwise) to fulfill the requirementsof Communist policy. Konstantinovsky reportsthe case of a judge who told him that he couldnot acquit or show leniency because of this con¬

trol ; and I have been told of cases in which Sovietpolice made the same observation to a prisoner.

Given the premises of the Soviet legal system,it is difficult to see how any other result couldbe expected.

Discussion

Dr. Wolff : There are a few questions whichhave come up from the floor. Dr. Lifton, some¬

one in the audience would like to know if youhave information on the persistence of the"thought reform" in those cases in which theprisoner seemed completely indoctrinated wheninterviewed by you. More specifically, how longhave some of these highly indoctrinated men re¬

mained so after their return to their originaldemocratic milieu?

Dr. Lifton: In trying to evaluate just howlong these effects last, I would say that we

really cannot know as yet, because we do nothave full data, and the effects are still going on

in many situations. There are three types ofresponse to Chinese Communist imprisonment : themost "successful," those of people who emergeapparently converted and convinced of their guilt;the least successful, those who have been relatively

PHILADELPHIA NEUROLOGICAL SOCIETYHarvey Bartle Jr., M.D., PresidingRegular Meeting, Feb. I, 1957

Trigeminal Neuralgia in Multiple Sclerosis.Dr. Aaron W. Mallín.Two new cases of trigeminal neuralgia asso¬

ciated with multiple sclerosis are reported, one

occurring eight and one-half years before evidenceof multiple sclerosis, the longest interval reportedto date, and the other seven months after themultiple sclerosis had its incipiency. In both casesthe trigeminal neuralgia was typical and unilateral,and it was relieved by alcohol injection in onecase and by section of the lower half of theGasserian ganglion in the other.

The literature is reviewed. Since 1905, a totalof 131 cases, including 5 in a personal communica¬tion, have been reported. In 22 of these theneuralgia occurred as the first symptom or at theonset of multiple sclerosis, and in 109 cases itoccurred later in the course of multiple sclerosis.

impervious to the process, and the large in-betweengroup, who come out more confused than con¬

vinced. Among all three of these groups, as theyreturn to their Western environments and thenew adjustment demands, the tendency is to revertto their former beliefs and values. We can speakof two phases : the immediate postrelease phase,in which there may a rather dramatic change, andthe longer period of reversion over several years,which we are still trying to evaluate. But thealmost universal tendency is, as I have mentioned,reversion to earlier beliefs and values. The Com¬munists can be fairly successful at extracting falseconfessions, but by and large they fail to convertthe Western prisoner.

Dr. Wolff : Mr. Biderman, I have a questionfrom the floor for you: On the basis of theexperience with prisoners, what is your opinionabout the preventive atrocity experiment in train¬ing? Will it increase or decrease anxiety whenthe real thing comes?

Mr. Biderman : We know with a fair amountof certainty that misinforming persons about thesepractices made them considerably more anxious.However, if we can accept the statements of thereturnees, had they only known what it was theywere to encounter at the start, they would havebeen far better able to cope with it when it oc¬curred. Accepting these statements, we feel thereis considerable evidence that to be forewarned isto be forearmed in this situation.

Dr. Wolff : A man who has been througha brainwashing experience once is a less goodsubject the second time. He is not as vulnerablethe second time.

In at least 76 of the latter group, some of whichwere not of multiple sclerosis, the neuralgia wasassociated with spastic paraplegia. However, it isbelieved that the coexistence of the two conditionshas been observed more frequently than it hasbeen reported. The neuralgia is typical andclassical, requires the usual treatment, but is more

frequently bilateral than when not associated withmultiple sclerosis.

The scanty pathologic reports are cited, andthe pathophysiology of trigeminal pain is discussed.It is concluded that a multineuronal reflex is in¬volved, the circuit including peripheral and centralafferent and efferent impulses.

DiscussionDr. Richard G. Berry : Dr. Alpers and I col¬

lected 329 cases of multiple sclerosis in 1947.

on June 3, 2011 Downloaded from