Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Security Dialogue 50 (4), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Security Dialogue page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/sdion SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
Accepted author manuscript, 271 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Deadly Force
T2 - Contract, Killing, Sacrifice
AU - Bradley, Arthur Humphrey
N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Security Dialogue 50 (4), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Security Dialogue page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/sdion SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
PY - 2019/8/1
Y1 - 2019/8/1
N2 - This article proposes a political prehistory of drone theory that traces its juridico-political evolution from the 17th century to the present day. To outline my argument, I construct a constellation between Hobbes’s theory of sovereign punishment in Leviathan and Chamayou’s critique of drone warfare in Drone Theory to illuminate the political origins of drone violence. First, I argue that Hobbes’s social contract theory lays the conceptual groundwork for Chamayou’s drone theory. Second, I contend that Hobbes’s theory of the sovereign punishment of domestic citizens preempts Chamayou’s critique of drone warfare against foreign enemies. Finally, I speculate that Hobbes’s theory of punishment is founded upon a sacrificial paradigm that returns in the phenomenon of domestic drone strikes. In summary, I argue that Hobbes might be something close to the first drone theorist insofar as his political theory systematically produces the state of exception between citizen and enemy in which the drone operates today. What, then, are the theoretical origins of drone warfare? How does the punishment of citizens prefigure drone warfare against foreign enemies? To what extent might even citizens themselves be a species of drone who may be activated by the sovereign at any point?
AB - This article proposes a political prehistory of drone theory that traces its juridico-political evolution from the 17th century to the present day. To outline my argument, I construct a constellation between Hobbes’s theory of sovereign punishment in Leviathan and Chamayou’s critique of drone warfare in Drone Theory to illuminate the political origins of drone violence. First, I argue that Hobbes’s social contract theory lays the conceptual groundwork for Chamayou’s drone theory. Second, I contend that Hobbes’s theory of the sovereign punishment of domestic citizens preempts Chamayou’s critique of drone warfare against foreign enemies. Finally, I speculate that Hobbes’s theory of punishment is founded upon a sacrificial paradigm that returns in the phenomenon of domestic drone strikes. In summary, I argue that Hobbes might be something close to the first drone theorist insofar as his political theory systematically produces the state of exception between citizen and enemy in which the drone operates today. What, then, are the theoretical origins of drone warfare? How does the punishment of citizens prefigure drone warfare against foreign enemies? To what extent might even citizens themselves be a species of drone who may be activated by the sovereign at any point?
KW - Chamayou
KW - contract
KW - drone
KW - Hobbes
KW - sacrifice
U2 - 10.1177/0967010619843477
DO - 10.1177/0967010619843477
M3 - Journal article
VL - 50
SP - 331
EP - 343
JO - Security Dialogue
JF - Security Dialogue
SN - 0967-0106
IS - 4
ER -