Drone Capitalism (2018)

The Cruel Drone: Imagining Drone Warfare in Art, Culture, and Politics, 2019

The dissertation investigates how military UAV’s (unmanned aerial vehicles), or so-called drones, are represented within the aesthetic field as a “drone imaginary,” reflecting radical changes in the history of warfare. Using the imaginary as a conceptual framework, the drone is analyzed as a cultural construct fueled with ideological and political imagination, including, above all, promises of liberation from the burdens and vulnerabilities of human lives and bodies in war. The main goal of the dissertation is to critically analyze how the drone imaginary builds on a fantasy of the perfect weapon which is, essentially, cruel. Drawing on Lauren Berlant’s thoughts and ideas, my claim is therefore that the social and cultural imagination of drone warfare follows a logic of cruel optimism. This means that the object for these desires, the drone, becomes an obstacle for its own flourishing by actively impeding the goal it promises to fulfill. In other words, my aim is to show how the popular attachment to drones is formed by fantasies and imaginations that are “cruel” in so far as they compromise themselves and obstruct their aims through a negative feedback loop, which constantly negates the promises these very same machines seem able to deliver on regarding a higher and safer mode of warfare. Each of the chapters in the dissertation contains examples that demonstrate how these fantasies and promises in turn prove to be flawed or imperfect. Using the realm of aesthetics as prism, the analyses expose the darker side of this drone imagination focusing on its inherent cracks and frailties that altogether undermine the legitimacy as well as soundness of the fantasy of the drone as a new wonder-weapon. For instance, the analyses show how figurations of drone automation is uncannily non-human; how drone invincibility also entail trauma; how dreams of total vision become blurred by immensity; and how the myth of surgical precision ends up as carnage. Thus, each chapter specifically examines one of these drone figurations in order to show how they are con-figured into the larger drone imaginary. Based on strategies of close-reading in combination with a cross-disciplinary conceptual approach, the dissertation offers new insights to the rapidly growing field of academic drone research. While this field has, however, so far mostly focused on the political, juridical, and ethical aspects of drone warfare and less on imaginary, literary, and aesthetic constructions and configurations vibrating beneath these debates, the dissertation contributes with an alternative cultural drone imaginary.

This article frames drone technology in terms of a volatile and contested relationality hinging on the experience ‘wirelessness’ more generally and shifting forms of visuality in particular. The experience of wireless networks always encompasses borders and peripheries, the blurred edges between object and subject or objective vision and subjective visualities. To call on a core concept of William James’s radical empiricism, wirelessness concerns the movement between conjunctive and disjunctive relations, their patchiness and the force of their sensation (Mackenzie, 2010: 1824). And it is in terms of the volatility of control at the edges – device and signal-control, control over ‘vertical publics’ and airspace vectors, and over vision and visuality – that the contest over drones has become intensely apparent. As a way of understanding the contested conceptual and material terrain of drone systems and usage, I examine the regulatory struggles that take aim at drones as unruly aerial objects with the capacity for privacy-invasive imaging. However, the aim is to consider drones beyond the ‘thingness’ of the object, as experience and as provocation, to reconsider wireless networks, visuality and camera-conscious sociality.

Millennium Journal of International Studies, 2020

This article offers a relational analysis of the use of armed drones in the ‘war on terror’. Drawing from Erin Manning’s writings on movement, relations, and the posthuman, I explore how bodies and spaces are read as digitised data in the processes of the drone assemblage, reducing movement to displacement and undoing relations of becoming. The drone’s violence lies in its crippling of bodies’ capacity to respond to their immediate environments and relations. The point of departure for this article is the concept of the ‘virtual’ as drawn out by Manning: the indeterminate potential of movement which moves bodies and relations. My analysis revisits the transcripts of Uruzgan drone attack in Afghanistan in 2010, a case that has been extensively studied in the critical literature on drones to offer conceptions of what it means for the drone to be a posthuman entity. Instead of situating the drone as a posthuman object, I examine it from a posthuman methodology where the focus is on relations, rather than determinate actors or outcomes. My intervention here is twofold: to propose a framework for understanding the drone’s violence in its processes of disrupting and undoing relations, and relatedly to argue for the methodological and theoretical value of the posthuman.

A convergence of four genealogies reveals drone power. Environmentality describes the contradictory uses of drones in conservation. Humanitarianism articulates how control is enacted and challenged in human crises. Securitization examines drones in surveillance and counter-surveillance. Militarization, the use of drones in war, explains domination from above and resistance from below. While theories of governmentality dominate, an emergent materialism within drone studies emphasizes the diffusion of power and agency. A synthesis of drone governmentality and drone materialism exposes four flightways or elemental trajectories. The drone is an existential technology-a tool for enlivenment and senescence. As such, drone power migrates between biopolitics and resistance. In doing so, drone performativity generates assemblages of human and nonhuman actants entangled at material-discursive and onto-epistemological levels. Entrapment designates the consequences of increasing dependency on technologies in sociotechnical systems of life and death.

Drones are in the air. The production of civilian drones for rescue, transport, and leisure activity is booming. The Danish government proclaimed civilian drones a national strategy in 2016. Accordingly, many research institutions as well as the industry focus on the development, usage, and promotion of drone technology. These efforts often prioritize commercialization and engineering as well as setting-up UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) test centers. As a result, urgent questions regarding how drone technology impacts our identity as humans as well as its effects on how we envision the human society are frequently underexposed in these initiatives.

Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 2016

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, or drones, are increasingly employed for military purposes. They are extolled for improving operational endurance and targeting precision on the one hand and keeping drone crew from harm on the other. In the midst of such praise, what falls by the wayside is an entangled set of concerns about the ways in which the relationship between the pilots and their operational environment is being reconfigured. This paper traces the various manifestations of this reconfiguration and goes on to situate our being-with drones in a broader set of sociotechnical practices that shape our understanding of visual technologies. Our inquiry is grounded in technical reports of performance, media coverage of accidents, as well as a detailed first-person account of a former drone pilot. Our analysis suggests that being-with drones is disciplining our perception in subtle ways that remain underexplored. We conclude that when it comes to appraising technologies that interface with the human sensorium, functionalist claims of enhancement are inadequate to the task and propose that phenomenology's commitment to the phenomena themselves can serve as a useful corrective.

Lund University, 2012

In this paper I explore the scopic regime of drone warfare as the production of the image as a site of meaning. The first part of the paper I describe what a drone is, through its technical specifications and through detailed reports on actual drone attacks in the recent ‘War on Terror.’ I highlight some of the contemporary debates surrounding its use and how drone technology has transformed the mechanization of war. In the second part of the paper I relate drone technology to a historical framework, specifically referring to the work of Walter Benjamin and his seminal essay, ”The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” This moves through a discussion of the relationship between vision and war during the First World War and political implications of representations of mechanized warfare during the aesthetic movement of the Futurists. The final section of the paper approaches specific aspects of drone technology that depart from mechanized warfare into a digital realm. These aspects connect to the development of artificial visual intelligence programs and the primacy of visual pattern recognition being increasingly utilized in drone surveillance. I highlight concepts in the work of Paul Virilio in his book, “The Vision Machine” such as telepresence and the industrialization of vision, in examining the contemporary implications of drone technology.

Carnegie Journal of Ethics & International Affairs, volume 28, issue 02, pp. 159-169.

The increasing reliance on drones is threatening our humanity—but not because of the inhumane ways we use Predator drones in warfare. It is a mistake “to use the term “drone” to refer only to these much publicized military devices. Drones, more precisely understood, are intelligent machines that—possessed of the capacity to perform repetitive tasks with efficiency, reliability, and mechanical rationality—increasingly displace the need for human thinking and doing. The trend Jünger and Turkle worry about is unmistakable: we are at risk of losing the rich and mature relationships that mark us as human. The rise of social robots, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other one-dimensional machines that act like humans—without the perceived human weaknesses of distraction, emotion, exhaustion, quirkiness, risk, and unreliability—answers a profound human desire to replace human judgment with the more reliable, more efficient, and more ra- tional judgment of machines. For all the superficial paeans to human instinct and intuition, human beings, in practice, repeatedly prefer drone-like reliability to the uncertain spontaneity of human intuition. In other words, we confront a future in which “human” is a derogatory adjective signifying inefficiency, incompetence, and backwardness.

The rapid increase in the use and capabilities of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), or “drones,” has led to debates on their place in US strategy, particularly their use in assassination missions, or so-called targeted killings. However, this debate has tended to focus narrowly on two questions: first, whether the US use of UAVs to assassinate its enemies,including US citizens, is legal, and second, whether drones shouldbe given the autonomy to decide when to kill humans. This paper uses the concept of “necro-politics”—the arrogation of the sovereign’s right both to command death and to assign grievable meaning to the dead— as it emerges in the work of Achille Mbembe to criticize the assumptions of these questions. It is argued that debates over endowing drones with the autonomy to kill humans assume that the current human operators of drones work outside of the context of racial distinction andcolonial encounter in which they already make decisions to kill. The paper supports this argument with reference to the text of a USinvestigation into a strike which killed civilians in Uruzgan province, Afghanistan