Control the Individual – Control the Freedom

In psychologist B.F. Skinner’s best-selling book Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971), he argued that freedom and dignity are illusions that hinder the science of behavior modification, which he claimed could create a better-organized and happier society. However, with exception to most politicians, many still see a society being ruled by benevolent control freaks – as antithetical to any democracy.

The political ramification of Skinnerian behavior modification techniques is now an obvious occurrence. “We do not take history seriously”; “And no wonder: if man knew no history, the (behaviorists) would govern the world, as Skinner himself has modestly proposed in his behaviorist utopia.” Walden Two (1948).

In these modern times, we see in place, a “token economy” being used increasingly in totalitarian states as one of behavior modification’s staple techniques. Yet, there are still anti-authoritarians who try their best to resist this type of behavior manipulation. Authoritarian State bureaucrats’ believe they should “give” people some sort of token at the expense of others in order to reward them for “prosocial behavior” after putting their party in power. Only later do the  deluded individuals discover how badly they have been extorted. Many, being over-socialized and zombiefied by heavy government-provided medications; still, they will accept these “tokens” and redistribute them all while shaking their heads in contempt at those authorities. They “respond” in this way because they innately are aware that they are not “beyond freedom and dignity.” Anti-authoritarians such as some of these individuals do not take seriously the rewards and punishments of the controlling authorities and will undermine and deprive authoritarian ideologies, utilizing such behavior modification, from having total dominion over them.

Nonetheless, behavior modification techniques excite authoritarian bureaucrats simply because it gives a “fix” to the addiction of having power over others. Fully utilizing the means and methods of classical and operant conditioning as tools and goals to meet their agendas; they ascertain that they can take any child or person and, given complete control of their environment, train them and mold them for any task or purpose they see fit. This notion is not new, and was developed in part by John B. Watson in his book Behaviorism (1924), later it was put into practice and use by government behaviorists and commercial marketing and advertising firms. Thus, here are two ideologies, behaviorism, and consumerism, both basically serving the same purpose, collectively achieving an incredible amount of power over most individuals and the societies in which they reside. Those individuals and groups however, are subsequently reduced and considered by consumerism and behaviorism as nothing more than merely passive, acquiescent, expendable objects to be manipulated in some way or another for profit or otherwise dubious reasons.

Corporatocracy, under the guise of neo-fascism, is an authoritarian system that requires unquestioning obedience to its authority. Herein lies a misplaced excitement about the amount of control, behavior modification can provide. Copious research on how behavior modification can work best on dependent, powerless, infantilized, bored, indoctrinated, and institutionalized individuals is well illustrated in Alfie Kohn’s work, Punished by Rewards (1993). The undercurrent of this work also reveals a rather terrifying incentive for authoritarian regimes to construct and create just this type of society to appease their impulse for power and control over individuals and groups within a society.

The way this method works is, “Individuals in each of these groups are necessarily dependent on powerful others for many of the things they most want and need, and their behavior usually can be shaped with relative ease.” At least that is according to management theorists Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham in Work Redesign (1980). Other researchers like Paul Thorne believe that in order to get people to behave in a particular way, they must be “needy enough so that rewards reinforce the desired behavior,” Fitting Rewards, (1990).

There are other methods in which to condition a society, especially those within it who dislike what they are doing. Alluding to the notion, rewards work best for those who are alienated from their work, or perceive themselves in some way as disenfranchised or marginalized by society. However, other research such as Kohn’s has shown that rewards are least effective when people are doing something they perceive as worthwhile or purposeful.

Nevertheless, it was found that rewards will have a detrimental effect on performance if two conditions are met: “first, when the task is interesting enough for the subjects that the offer of incentives is a superfluous source of motivation; second, when the solution to the task is open-ended enough that the steps leading to a solution are not immediately obvious.” Token incentives are relative, the greater the reward, the easier the task that is chosen; while without rewards, most humans are more likely to accept a challenge. Consequently, there remains the insidious motivation for authoritarian controllers to gain the most control over their subjects behavior and to do so, their subjects need to perceive themselves as being infantilized, dependent, alienated, and bored.

It is not surprising that behaviorists see freedom, choice, and intrinsic motivations as illusory, or what Skinner called “phantoms.” It was also Skinner’s view that science should be prohibited from examining internal states and intrinsic forces. This in and of itself is an unscientific view of science. In most democracies, citizens are free to think for themselves and explore, being motivated by very real – not phantom – intrinsic forces, including curiosity and a desire for justice, a sense of community, and solidarity. What is truly frightening about authoritarian behaviorists is that their external controls are specifically directed to destroy the intrinsic forces of humanity’s traits that are necessary to form a democratic society.

Several studies have also shown that giving “tokens” or rewards for doing something enjoyable can kill interest for weeks at a time and can also destroy intrinsic desire and drive; in addition, the use of tokens or rewards to motivate individuals actually can make them less cooperative and generous than their peers. If such behavior modification is enacted in early developmental stages, how are children to become ethical and caring adults? Certainly, they need an environment where they can be nurtured, cared about, taken seriously, and respected, which they in turn, can then model and reciprocate.

Unfortunately, society, culture, politics, and psychology intersect through the legitimization of conditioning and controlling individual and societal behavior by whatever means is necessary and of course, by whatever the market will bear.

Excerpts gleaned from Behavior Modification and an Authoritarian Society, Bruce Levine, Ph.D.