« AnteriorContinuar »
Mr. Jon Es. Yes. I attended public schools in Roslyn and in Spokane, Washington. I attended Gonzaga University in Spokane from 1937 through 1941. I entered the Army in 1942. I have a bachelor of science degree in military science from the University of Maryland, awarded in 1956. I have a master of arts degree in psychology awarded by the University of Kansas City in 1963. For the last 41% years I have been studying in the sociology department of the American University. I have completed all the course work and qualifying examinations for a Ph. D. and I am presently writing my dissertation on civil disturbances. Mr. McNAMARA. A brief résumé, please, of your professional or employment background. Mr. JoWEs. I entered the United States Army in 1942. I served for a period of 20 years. I retired in 1962 as a lieutenant colonel, Military Police Corps. During that time I had two tours of duty in Europe, the first during World War II and the second from 1955 through 1958. During my last tour of duty I was a member of 508th Military Police Battalion. I served 2 years in that battalion at Munich, Germany, as plans, training, operations, intelligence, and security officer. I also participated in the occupation of Japan from 1946 to 1949. My assignments in the United States include 2 years as commanding officer of the Harlem Military Police detachment and an assignment as the provost marshal of Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. I also served as the military adviser to the two military police battalions of the District of Columbia National Guard for a period of 21% years. Mr. McNAMARA. During the course of your military service, did you take any additional educational courses? Mr. JoSEs. Yes. During that time, I completed the Military Police Officer's basic and advanced courses at Fort Gordon, Georgia, the Military Police criminal investigations course, and the Military Police industrial security course. Mr. McNAMARA. In what type of work have you engaged since your retirement from the military service in 1962? Mr. Jon Es. For the past 4% years I have been engaged in research and study in the area of internal security. That is the maintenance of public confidence, public safety, law and order. I am employed by the Center for Research in Social Systems of the American University. Mr. McNAMARA. That was formerly known as SORO, the Special Operations Research Office? Mr. Jon Es. That is correct. During the time I have been with this organization I have coauthored a study entitled “Combating Subervisely Manipulated Civil Disturbances.” I am a guest lecturer at the International Police Academy, Public Safety Division, of the Agency for International Development. My subject there is the “Psychological Aspects of Civil Disturbances.” I am also a guest lecturer for the International Association of Chiefs of Police. My subject there is “Police Community Relations and Social Science Research.” Mr. McNAMARA. Have your studies, Mr. Jones, concerned civil disturbances or riots both here and abroad and both those which are non
subversive, as well as those which are subversive in nature? Mr. Jox Es. Yes.
Mr. McNAMARA. Is it also true that your emphasis has been on internal security problems created by subversive manipulation of riots and on what internal security forces can do to counter these elements?
Mr. JONES. Yes.
Mr. McNAMARA. Would it be accurate, Mr. Jones, to say that you have a total of approximately 25 years of experience, study, and research in the handling of unruly and criminal elements, both individual and group?
Mr. JONES. Yes.
Mr. McNAMARA. What in your opinion, Mr. Jones, is the relationship between internal security and subversively manipulated riots or civil disturbances?
Mr. Jones. I would like to repeat something that I previously said, that internal security is conceptualized as the maintenance of public confidence, public safety, law and order. The subversive manipulation of riots is designed to disrupt this internal security and finally to break it down completely.
Mr. McNAMARA. Regarding your studies and research on this subject, would you outline for the committee the approach you have taken?
Mr. Jones. Yes, I will.
First, I would like to say that law enforcement has not been extensively researched. The approach taken in studying subversively manipulated civil disturbances was to integrate material from three different areas. Those areas are political subversion, community conflict, and the control of mobs and crowds. This systematic approach was selected because everything surrounding a riot tends to become controversial. This includes reports by committees and commissions and also research. Perhaps all individuals who become involved in the prevention, control, and investigation of riots should ask, “Am I helping with the solution or am I part of the problem?"
Mr. McNAMARA. What methods were used in your study and research?
Mr. Jones. This study was cross-cultural and used the historical descriptive method based upon information gathered from secondary sources, which included historical, social science, police operational, and news media references. The study utilized a social science approach which included the investigation of the social, psychological, economic, and political aspects of the problem.
Civil disturbances, regardless of the scope of the salient issues involved, take place in specific geographical areas which are social communities such as villages, towns, cities, and the subdivisions of larger cities. These communities can be described along several dimensions. These dimensions are characterized by their social, religious, economic, and geographic composition.
Mr. McNAMARA. Did your study reveal, Mr. Jones, certain differences between riots and civil disturbances that might be classified as natural or spontaneous and those which are subversively manipulated ?
Mr. JONES. Yes.
Mr. McNAMARA. We will go into those differences later. At this time would you tell the committee whether your studies reveal, as well, that there are some basic elements necessary for any riot, whether it is subversively manipulated or not?
Mr. JoSEs. Yes, there are identifiable salient basic elements. Mr. McNAMARA. What is one of these basic elements? Mr. JoSEs. One of the basic elements that can be identified is group hostility or antagonism. Now this antagonism or hostility may be latent or active. It may arise from anger, frustration, fear, or anxiety. It may be felt or directed against other groups or against authority. This hostility or antagonism must be aroused to a high emotional stage in order to trigger a crowd to violent action. Mr. IcHoRD. On that point, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Jones has done a great deal of study in regard to riots. Would you give as simply as you can, sir, your definition of a riot? I am sure we do not have any legal definition of a riot. Mr. JoSEs. Yes, I will. This is one of the methodological problems in studying riots in social science-type research. There are several legal definitions. These definitions, however, are not satisfactory for research purposes. For research purposes we have defined a riot as an unruly type of social violence, usually engaged in by a large number of people. We don't want to say 100 people or 20 people because we feel this would cause us to eliminate some of the riots that should be studied. Mr. ICHORD. That is violence to persons or property? Mr. JoxEs. That is correct. Mr. McNAMARA. From the community viewpoint, Mr. Jones, who and what are the basic component elements in a riot situation? Mr. JoSEs. I would say, number one, dissident groups with real or imaginary grievances. And I would like to say that we found out in É. course of our study that it does not make too much difference whether a grievance is real or imaginary as long as it is a powerful determinant of human behavior. Now these dissident groups may be subversive or nonsubversive. They may be groups that are anti-status quo or anti-other groups, or groups that may be dissident for a variety of other reasons. One of the essentials is a crowd. There are several ways of describing a crowd. A physiological crowd is located close together. Psychological crowds that have the same attitude and the same frame of mind are very important. These crowds may be spontaneous, casual, or planned and intentional. ne of the important components is the agitator. The agitator may or may not be subversive. He may or he may not intend to trigger a riot. - . . Another very important component element is the precipitating incident. This incident may be either accidental or spontaneous, natural or developed. r Another basic component that we find is the various types of internal security forces that are brought in to prevent or try to control civil disturbances. Then another important element is the general population of the community. Mr. sons. In answering an earlier question, Mr. Jones, you indicated that a considerable amount of research had already been done on the subject of community conflict. Will you tell us briefly what that research indicates?
Mr. JoxEs. Yes. Community conflicts, once they have begun, tend to resemble one another markedly. The initial issues of controversy undergo significant changes with the passage of time. Specific issues tend to give way to general issues and new grievances arise. The new issues tend to be one-sided in that they allow response in only one direction. Thus they do not disrupt the internal solidarity of the individual groups in the conflict, but tend to strengthen this intragroup solidarity. These issues must be controversial enough to gain the attention of members of the community who have not previously been involved in the conflict. As the community conflict continues to escalate, the cometing groups become completely polarized upon the salient issues. ostility and suspicion also increase in magnitude. The probability of social violence increases as the community conflict becomes more intense. Mr. McNAMARA. You also stated, Mr. Jones, in answering an earlier question that your studies revealed there were certain differences between what might be called the spontaneous riot and those that are subversively manipulated. Can you tell us what those differences are : Mr. JoWEs. Yes. Basically, of course, the big difference is that the ordinary riot just develops more or less because of prevailing conditions. The other type is deliberately planned or instigated. In determining the character .P a riot, it must be kept in mind that the subversive is interested in a riot for a political purpose, not for the sake of violence alone. He is opposed to the existing form of government. He wants to change it, to substitute a new and different type power structure for the existing one. He uses the riot as one means of gaining this objective. Normally, subversives have no hope of overthrowing a government through one riot, but they do see in a riot a means of weakening the existing power structure and of turning people against it. This, of course, is the basic first step in destroying an existing political system. Subversives do not want to solve existing social, political, and economic problems; they are not spontaneously rebelling against social, political, or economic situations, but are using a real or concocted grievance to promote their cause. They have a definite ideological attachment and Our DOSe. Mr. McNAMARA. How can you tell, Mr. Jones—that is, what do your studies indicate to be clues or evidence of a riot which is subversively manipulted? Mr. JoSEs. First, let me say that the reason we developed this system, this analytic device, was so that speculation about this matter might be eliminated. We find that people in discussing the subversive manipulation of riots tend to use what we call validation by specific example. This type of approach is very unscientific, and almost anything that one can think of can be validated by selecting an appropriate specific example. Accurately distinguishing a spontaneous from 8. oversively manipulated civil disturbance can be a very difficult task. Our research reveals that in order to systematically study riotous civil disturbances the time sequence involved can be broken down into four phases. Each one must be individually studied and analyzed. Intelligence information is essential to the study of these phases, which are as follows:
The precrowd phase, the crowd phase, the civil disturbance phase, and the post-civil disturbance phase. Mr. McNAMARA. Would you discuss each one of these phases in turn, indicating the differences during each phase between the spontaneous riot and the one that is subversively manipulated, starting with the precrowd phase? Mr. JoSEs. Yes. The precrowd phase, this is the preparatory period which is characterized by the development of antagonisms within a community between groups which have a different position on some economic, social, political, or other issue. If the riot which follows, however, is subversively manipulated, study and analysis based on intelligence information will reveal the following about the precrowd hase. p (a) A subversive organization, newly created or in existence for some time, is working to develop a riot situation. The first step is to build the organization, to recruit and train its personnel to put its plans into action. Subversives train their members and followers in crowd manipulation, in riot tactics, and the use of weapons. They give them instructions on issues that can be used to create conflict in the community. (b) They select their target groups on the basis of the conflict potential in the community. A basic Communist belief is that masses are subject to manipulation and can be utilized for Communist purposes. Subversives identify dissident groups, that is, target groups, within the community and attempt to infiltrate their ranks. (c) They launch vital preconditioning neasures to influence the attitudes of these target groups. Subversives use flyers, posters, rumors, and all available means of communication to increase hostility and antagonism, to aggravate grievances, to stimulate frustrations, dissent, anxiety, anger, and to develop emotional stress. Through these preconditioning communications they attempt to unite dissident groups. To do this they concentrate on local breadand-butter issues. They repeat certain themes over and over again. Specific slogans and phrases are used to condition the target groups to react to these slogans and phrases under emotional stress. They try to personalize the enemy, to direct the resentment of the people against a specific person, symbol, or object. It may be the mayor of the city administration or the chief of police. In instances such as agitation against the war in Vietnam, it may be the Secretary of State, or the Secretary of Defense. The issues on which they agitate are usually specific to begin with. Gradually they are changed and become more general. The issues are carefully selected so that they will not create differences among the soliduals who compose the target group, but rather will tend to unite them. An example is police brutality. Issues on "...'. agitate must be controversial to arouse interest, tension, and frustration. At the same time they are expressed in moral terms so as to win support for those making the charges and to create antagonism against those accused. For example, the charges can be inefficiency, dishonesty, brutality, and claims that the subversive or front groups are fighting for justice, equality, and so forth.