Violence in the Western only carries meaning within a rule-governed moral economy

Evidence

The current use of drones, in its own way, falls into place in the continuous line of such “asymmetrical wars” involving machine guns marshaled against spears or rusty old guns, in “little wars” that are already no longer heroic or even really “wars” in the same sense that a Westerner who saw himself as a Greek warrior would give to that word. If there was any repugnance felt at the use of ignoble means, it was present only in situations where the conflict was between equals, rather than simply a matter of putting down inferiors. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 339 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Westerns encoded a rule-governed moral economy governing villain deaths.; Moral limits on weapons apply only where adversaries are equals — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 339; Colonial classification of violence as private revenge dismissed assailants’ broader claims (+1 more)

Related

• Forbidden weapons were deemed acceptable in colonial wars but not between equals (similarity 0.85)
• Moral limits on weapons apply only where adversaries are equals (similarity 0.84)
• Eliminating reciprocal exposure to violence makes drones look like cowardly weapons. (similarity 0.79)
• Combatants grasp their own essence only by being the object of an opponent’s weapon (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Moral limits on weapons apply only where adversaries are equals #qualifies (0.55) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 339
• Colonial classification of violence as private revenge dismissed assailants’ broader claims #complicates (0.50)
• Colonial powers impose a double moral standard demanding restraint only from the colonized #exemplifies (0.45)