The right's Jack Bauer fetish

One more reason why The American Conservative is becoming such a hot read: Michael Brendan Dougherty's critical analysis of the cult of 24's Jack Bauer on the Right, and how it undermines the public's moral sense. Excerpt:

Agent Jack Bauer has tortured his own brother, used household appliances to electrocute a terror suspect, staged the execution of a child, and even shot a man’s wife to get information from him. On any given day, he will disarm suitcase nukes and presidential assassins. The orders of superior officers at the Counter Terrorist Unit don’t deter him, the rule of law and even the threat of death do not diminish Bauer’s iron will to defend America.
[snip]
The frequent recourse to torture has attracted the attention of both the military and veteran interrogators in the FBI. As reported by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker, several experts advised 24’s creative team about techniques that are more effective than torture at obtaining information. Army Brigadier Gen. Patrick Finnegan, dean of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, let producers and writers know that the show exerted a strong and noxious influence over his students. The newest recruits have been watching Jack Bauer since they were 14. The general told Mayer, “The disturbing thing is that although torture may cause Jack Bauer some angst, it is always the patriotic thing to do.” One former Army interrogator related how soldiers in Iraq watch DVDs of the show and then try to imitate Bauer’s interrogation methods on their own prisoners.
[snip]
The devotion to 24 and its protagonist demonstrates what few may care to admit: in the war on terror, the conservative movement has become willing to sacrifice principle to passion and difficult moral reasoning to utility. As escapism, 24 is riveting; as a parable for our time, it is revolting.

I think there's an analogue between Jack Bauer and Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry -- the cop who was willing to do whatever it took to subdue the forces of criminal anarchy at a time when the institutions fail to protect the public. Dirty Harry became a popular icon at a time when the public -- at least the conservative member of the public -- were sick and tired of out-of-control crime, and pusillanimous public officials' inability to deal with it.

One can certainly understand the attraction of a Bauer figure in these times, just as Dirty Harry was completely understandable as an expression of the popular anxiety of the 1970s. But as Dougherty points out with reference to Bauer, it's a dangerous temptation for conservatives to accept and esteem a fantasy figure who breaks the law -- especially the moral law (e.g., torture) -- in the service of his mission. And conservatives are very quick (and quite accurate) to argue, when it comes to sexuality, that the content of popular culture has real-world consequences by making acceptable previously taboo ideas. As the Jane Mayer piece cited by Dougherty pointed out, "24"'s valorization of torture is having an impact. Here's Mayer:

Gary Solis, a retired law professor who designed and taught the Law of War for Commanders curriculum at West Point, told me that he had similar arguments with his students. He said that, under both U.S. and international law, “Jack Bauer is a criminal. In real life, he would be prosecuted.” Yet the motto of many of his students was identical to Jack Bauer’s: “Whatever it takes.” His students were particularly impressed by a scene in which Bauer barges into a room where a stubborn suspect is being held, shoots him in one leg, and threatens to shoot the other if he doesn’t talk. In less than ten seconds, the suspect reveals that his associates plan to assassinate the Secretary of Defense. Solis told me, “I tried to impress on them that this technique would open the wrong doors, but it was like trying to stomp out an anthill.”

Liberals who sneer at conservative complaints about the deleterious social effects of film, television and music would do well to consider this point about "24" and torture. In her New Yorker report, Mayer continues:

Since September 11th, depictions of torture have become much more common on American television. Before the attacks, fewer than four acts of torture appeared on prime-time television each year, according to Human Rights First, a nonprofit organization. Now there are more than a hundred, and, as David Danzig, a project director at Human Rights First, noted, “the torturers have changed. It used to be almost exclusively the villains who tortured. Today, torture is often perpetrated by the heroes.” The Parents’ Television Council, a nonpartisan watchdog group, has counted what it says are sixty-seven torture scenes during the first five seasons of “24”—more than one every other show. Melissa Caldwell, the council’s senior director of programs, said, “ ‘24’ is the worst offender on television: the most frequent, most graphic, and the leader in the trend of showing the protagonists using torture.”

The show’s villains usually inflict the more gruesome tortures: their victims are hung on hooks, like carcasses in a butcher shop; poked with smoking-hot scalpels; or abraded with sanding machines. In many episodes, however, heroic American officials act as tormentors, even though torture is illegal under U.S. law.

The show's lead writer describes to Mayer what he does as "improvisations in sadism."

Improvisations in sadism -- and he's not bothered by this. This cannot be a matter of moral indifference to conservatives. Cheers to Dougherty and TAC for having the stones to write and publish this essay.