Skip to main content

The oldest and strongest form of propaganda in this country is the belief that white America has the right to dominate everyone else on the earth, and as president Obama functions as the whitest man in the country. The siren song of Manifest Destiny outlived the 19th century and is still alive now in the 21st. It has been called many things, anti-communism during the Cold War, and the war against terror now, but it all amounts to the same thing.

We are told to fear the communist, or militant Islam, or whatever the enemy du jour happens to be. The end result is the same from a people who are convinced of their own goodness and paradoxically their right to have their violent way in the world. It is never very difficult to get support for killing and maiming among people who think themselves morally superior.

As a ghetto nerd member of the hip hop generation, I came of age in the 1980s and early 1990s. In that moment, there were a few movies that were fixed in the rotation. Star Wars, Star Trek, Conan, The Final Countdown, and Flash Gordon were all canon. Star Trek fans will argue that Roddenberry's franchise invented the future. They are partly correct. However, Terminator is the movie most eerily prescient of the post 9/11 endless War on Terror world.

The original Terminator is a wonderfully efficient action movie. Its mix of sci-fi elements, action, and warnings about "the future" was the topic of many a ghetto nerd salon. How many of us argued about the Terminator time travel paradox? Debated if T2 was better than the first film? Endlessly quoted Arnold's gun shop dialogue?

Other 1980s movies like The Day After and Threads were terrifying. Damnation Alley was memorable for the giant cockroaches that ate Paul Winfield. War Games was provocative. Red Dawn was teenage circle jerk war porn that made no sense at all...except in the minds of Reagan era jingoists like Oliver North, the white militia crowd, and teenagers who had never heard of the stopping power of water.

Terminator was the source of nightmares: I know I am not the only person of a certain age who had disturbing dreams where they hid from Hunter Killers and tried to fight T-800 series cyborgs who were impervious to our weapons. Funny though, we always found a way to win in the end. Perhaps I am the eternal optimist?

We are officially adults when our future fantasies become the real, the mundane, and the stuff of the day-to-day. There is a black man in the White House. Barack Obama, my favorite "space coon," is quite literally the stuff of science fiction. Because the genre has traditionally solved the "race problem" by writing people of color out of the story, there is a tension when we are present--one that the white racial frame must resolve if it is to remain coherent.

For example, in many recent films and TV series a black man is cast as President of the United States. But, the world is in turn faced with calamity and disaster. This motif is not a coincidence; rather, it represents a deep insecurity about what occurs when the racial order is upended.

To point, in the Terminator franchise it is a black man who is most directly responsible for Skynet and the apocalypse it visits upon humanity. President Obama is not Miles Dyson; however, Barack's willingness to unleash his UAV-Terminator army on the "enemies" of the United States is worthy of the best pulp fiction of the 1930s and 1940s.

I am not suggesting that the Predator and Reaper drones of today are at all comparable to the monstrosities of the Terminator films. The former are simply more fully evolved remote controlled airplanes that the military has been experimenting with since at least World War 2. The 3rd or 4th generation UAV's (depending on how far back you count) are not independent, could not survive in a reasonably defended airspace, are prone to mechanical failure, can be easily hacked, and their capabilities are exaggerated by those who are on the payroll of the military-industrial complex.

While the next generation(s) of these machines will incorporate "ethical governors" that help dictate semi-autonomous operation, i.e. the robots will decide who to kill according to a set of rules (perhaps most terrifyingly, these machines will even be used to torture "enemy prisoners"), at present they are just in their relative infancy.

Obama's drones are an extension of a belief that war can be done on the cheap. Coupled with the large disconnect between the small percentage of the American people who serve in the military, and the general public (as well as policy making elites), this makes conflict more (as opposed to less) likely.

There has been much information released as of late detailing the industrial scale killing apparatus of the Obama administration. There are secret kill lists. Decks of playing cards are used as visual aids in order to decide who should live and who should die. American citizens and their families are immolated by remotely piloted vehicles. Bureaucrats control multiple UAV's at one time, killing people overseas who are just image enhanced pixels on a targeting screen.

Imperial America is based on a premise of cheap life. Ultimately, some people are considered less than, and more worthy of extermination by virtue of national identity, location, color, or imagined affiliation with some political cause that is at present "hostile" to American elites' geopolitical interests.

Who can argue against sending robots to kill foreigners? No skin off of our proverbial backs, right?

There are technologies of racism and dominance. The UAV is one of these devices.

It is important to note that the Racial State was also an imperial and colonial project. As such, rationalizations for how technology could be used to kill and oppress were a necessary part of the Racial State's bureaucracy. Consequently, there were certain weapons which were only deemed fit for killing "savages." No white man should be subject to such "dishonorable," impersonal, or "cruel" devices.

This logic is a cousin to that of American Exceptionalism. By implication, the lives of people in this country are worth more than those of human beings elsewhere.

In this way, the UAV of the 21st century is like the machine gun of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Consider the following passage from John Ellis' book The Social History of the Machine Gun:

By now then the picture should be clear. The machine gun was a vitally useful tool in the colonization of Africa. Time and time again automatic fire enabled small groups of settlers or soldiers to stamp out any indigenous resistance to their activities or to extend their writ over large parts of the African continent...The reasons for this complacency are not hard to find.

They are to be found in the ideology of British imperialism, whose very essence was an unquestioning belief in the innate superiority of the white race, and the British in particular.

Without such beliefs it would have been impossible for the original colonisers to set such a low price on African lives. For only by holding them so cheap could the slaughter of natives seem to be morally acceptable. The belief in white supremacy was the very bedrock of Imperialist attitudes, and is evident in all their manifestations. At best the Europeans regarded those they slaughtered with little more than amused contempt...

Thus, when it becomes necessary to kill those who stand in one's way, the problem is seen in technical rather than human terms. It is simply a matter of "bagging" as many natives as possible with the minimum effort. The machine gun filled these requirements admirably...

Thus, because the machine gun had become so much a part of the imperialist sideshows, it came to be regarded, by definition, as a weapon that had no place upon the conventional battlefield. The European was so obviously superior to the African, so why would he be so stupid as to be baulked by a weapon that was really only good for bowling over 'niggers' and 'Kaffirs'?

Of all the chickens that came home to roost and cackle over the battlefields of the First World War, none was more raucous than the racialism that had somehow assumed that the white man would be invulnerable to those same weapons that had slaughtered natives in their thousands.

So the machine gun became came to be regarded as a weapon suitable only for use against native Africans and the like. Of the Ashanti campaign of 1873, the Army and Navy Journal said, 'We are not surprised that the Ashantees were awestruck by the power of the Gatling gun. It is a weapon which is specially adapted to terrify a barbarous or semi-civilized foe.'

Sound familiar?

What happens when UAV technology proliferates and America's enemies use the very same logic that the leadership class in the Pentagon, CIA, and White House does today? Is it okay if China or some other country decides that killing 10 or 20 or 50 Americans to get one "terrorist" is a reasonable return on investment?

How will the American people respond when it it is their kin who are killed by robots? Will the gloating cease? Will there be a moment of inward looking critical self-reflection, or will the mouth-breathing classes ask (as they did on 9-11) "why do they hate us?"

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The drones are not an Obama thing. (3+ / 0-)

    I've been covering drones and assassination by remote control since about 2004 on Hannah Blog.

    When Congress passed the Authorization to Use Military Force against people of whom we are afraid or suspect of having nefarious aims, this process was put in place.  The AUMF should have been rescinded long ago. We've been arguing that for six years now.  But, as long as we keep electing congress-critters on the basis of their looks, their gender, their hair dos and their ancestors, it ain't gonna happen.

    Re-electing Barack Obama is the rational thing to do.  Electing a responsive Congress is the wise thing.  Will we do it?  Not if we keep letting ourselves by distracted by the clowns.

    "In the name of the nation, and of the dollar and of the rule of law, you and your children shall sacrifice for the good of all." Rmoney's prayer

    by hannah on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 01:49:19 PM PDT

  •  You know the answer (8+ / 0-)
    How will the American people respond when it it is their kin who are killed by robots?
    We'll go kill thousands upon thousands of brown people.

    Ta Nehisi Coats did a good post on the kill list, which included this on the racismof the not-counting-civilian-death strategy.

    The Obama administration considers any military-age male in the vicinity of a bombing to be a combatant. That is an amazing standard that shares an ugly synergy with the sort of broad-swath logic that we see employed in Stop and Frisk,  with NYPD national spy network, with the killer of Trayvon Martin.
  •  S-t-r-e-t-c-h. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    johnny wurster, palantir

    I thought Arabs were white.  Or at least light brownish.  Seriously, if this is the argument you bring to the WOT debate, wear a helmet.

    Where are we, now that we need us most?

    by Frank Knarf on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 02:15:26 PM PDT

  •  The nearer analogue to the Gatling gun (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG, Larsstephens

    is the heavy bomber. If we wish to simply kill brown people in huge numbers, a wing of B-52's dropping 80 bombs apiece is much more efficient than a Predator armed with a couple of Hellfires.

    The drones are more akin to assassins throwing bombs. The target is killed and everyone around him.

    The point about China is a false equivalency until the day comes when China cannot extradite a person planning violence against Chinese citizens from the United States. That is why drones are used in Yemen and Pakistan but not in Germany, even if the person in Germany is brown.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra En théorie, il n'y a aucune différence entre théorie et pratique, mais en pratique, il y a toujours une différence. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 02:19:50 PM PDT

    •  yes and no (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cartoon Peril, adrianrf

      the american exceptionalism argument is thick here, as is the callous disregard for life.

      wait and see. and do not buy into the "precision" argument about American military power. we can talk all day long about "aim points" and "kill radiuses" if you like. The fact remains the wanton murder of many innocents for one "guilty" party would not be tolerated if done against Americans or Europeans.

      Don't hold your breath on your China example. Be weary of simple reductionism as well.

    •  Actually no. The heavy bomber is a rather (0+ / 0-)

      inefficient way to kill people, or at least it was in WW2.  Plus it has the disadvantage of exposing air crew to death or worse, capture in Bombthehelloutofitstan.

      You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

      by Cartoon Peril on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 08:12:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  funny how (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Cartoon Peril

        that misconception still holds true. total war via air bombardment certainly didn't break germany. it was tac air and intermediate air that did it. doesn't some research actually suggest that germany's industries became more efficient as opposed to less-or the damage was minimal--during the bombing raids of the war?

        damn facts.

        •  The Strategic Bombing Survey showed that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue aardvark

          indeed heavy bombing had done a real number on Germany but the cost was enormous, and since Germany was not performing at full efficiency until 1944, the bombing prior to that had little overall effect.

          The bombing did destroy the Luftwaffe and forced the diversion of resources into things like anti-aircraft.

          You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

          by Cartoon Peril on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 09:25:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Breathtaking! (0+ / 0-)

    Does this mean that the pointed stick was also invented to promote racism?

    Insisting that there are no shades of grey greatly simplifies an argument, but it leads inevitably to the ridiculous notion that black and white are the only possible choices.

    The world is just a shade more complicated than that.

    OK. And now we begin the part of the show where we pull out individual words and phrases of the commenter to try to determine the "real" meaning of the comment.... let the games begin.

    by hillbrook green on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 02:21:29 PM PDT

  •  I deplore the use of drone strikes (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cartoon Peril

    It's a policy we need to step away from. This is unnecessarily creating future problems for which we will have "no tool in the toolbox to fix."

    I plead guilty to gross naivete if I am overestimating the level of available technology, but can't we simply keep these guys on "permanent live feed to some undisclosed location" with a steady rotation of significantly smaller drones?

    When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative. --Martin Luther King Jr.

    by Egalitare on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 02:33:03 PM PDT

  •  No non-Muslim has ever been killed by a drone. (0+ / 0-)

    I don't think that's a coincidence.

    You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

    by Cartoon Peril on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 08:13:57 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site