by Joe Scarry
|Drones: serving man. (Or . . . ?)|
The months of April and May saw a large number of protests against the U.S. program of targeted killing with drones, and progress in challenging that program in Congress.
An interesting question was raised on a listserve: “Why focus on drone attacks?” The questioner — a dedicated peace activist with an inquiring mind — explained that he felt a bit perplexed:
Here’s how I responded:
I’m curious to know if other people agree with me. What is your experience? Is the movement against drones helping to build consciousness about the deeper issues of consent? Or are we being sidetracked by paying too much attention to other aspects of drone warfare?
Please join the conversation.
If the public will join us in asking the question “Who decides?” about drone executions, I believe they will rapidly come to realize that they are utterly dissatisfied with what the government is saying.
(See Who Decides? (When Drones are Judge, Jury, and Executioner) )
Now comes the messy part. We need many more people to engage with with the emotions aroused by drones. This is going to involve many different groups of people, engaging with this topic in many different ways: churches and faith groups . . . young people . . . . The point is: the discourse on drones is going to get out of our hands. It isn’t always going to go the way we want. But the important thing is that many, many people are going to be talking about it in the ways that feel appropriate to them.
(See Democracy vs. Drones)
Elaine Scarry demonstrates that the power of one leader to obliterate millions of people with a nuclear weapon – a possibility that remains very real even in the wake of the Cold War – deeply violates our constitutional rights, undermines the social contract, and is fundamentally at odds with the deliberative principles of democracy.
(See Reviews of “Thermonuclear Monarchy: Choosing Between Democracy and Doom” by Elaine Scarr