zlacker

I think the results of the Stanford Prison Experiment have been pretty heavily disputed, and it cannot be re-tested due to ethical concerns.

I personally don't think it's making the agents worse, but rather that it's very heavily selecting for very bad people. If you have a job where people can be violent and abusive with little-to-no oversight, you are going to select for people who want to do violent and abusive things. Keep in mind, these people aren't being "drafted" into ICE, they're voluntarily joining, meaning that they had to demonstrate some interest in it.

This doesn't imply that every ICE agent is a terrible person, just like how not every Catholic priest abuses children, but if you create a selection pressure then it isn't surprising when you get what you selected for.

Sample size of one but bear with me; I am an asshole but I am a decidedly non-violent person. I genuinely do not want to commit any form of violence on people. Law enforcement doesn't seem appealing to me because it pays worse than software and I wouldn't view physically attacking people with impunity as a benefit.

>>tomber+(OP)
Lots of ICE were recruited from the BOP (Federal Prison). It's going to be interesting when they go back to that job with the current ICE culture ingrained. I foresee a lot of Bivens lawsuit payouts.

>>tomber+(OP)
Milgram's a better example, without the baggage that Zimbardo brought to the table. Milgram's lesson: if an authority figure calls for an illegal, harmful, or unethical action, they won't have to go very far down the line until they find someone willing to carry it out, even if the first couple of people refuse.

ICE is said to be paying signing bonuses up to $50,000 [1]. That must seem like a fortune to the sorts of people they are recruiting... people who would happily do stuff like this for free if given permission.

1: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqle5newg0no