SM Stirling's and David Drake's Raj Whitehall has reason to believe that he is an Avatar of the Spirit. However, his men, with his approval, loot, destroy and rape in a captured town. His "Spirit" and my Buddha within have parted company.
Which is preferable: that human beings remain confined to a single planet or that they commit atrocities on many planets? CS Lewis thought that even the first Moon landing would be a desecration (see here) whereas I agree with Poul Anderson that a multiplicity of extraterrestrial, then extra-solar, colonies would facilitate human diversity.
High technology should make war, and certainly looting, redundant. However, one scenario imagined by Anderson, and also by Stirling & Drake, is the spread of humanity to many planets followed by the loss of technology. In those hypothetical futures, there will be wars accompanied by looting and rape.
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
Exactly! What we see in the campaigns of Raj Whitehall and his enemies was of how low standards were when it came to setting limits on what it was believed permissible for soldiers to do in times of war. And I think we are also seeing the beginnings of what we now consider the laws and customs of war by civilized peoples. First, Raj Whitehall made it ruthlessly plain he would not allow his men to loot, rape, and kill among their own people. That, however minimal, was a start. Later, we see Raj offering people a chance to surrender, unmolested and unlooted, if they would accept the rule of the Civil Government. With the warning, however, that rebellion would be remorselessly punished. In other cases, enemies defeated in battle were given the chance to surrender on similar terms, if they would yield up one third of their lands to the CG. Obstinate die hards would face the full rigors of war.
Not exactly what the Geneva Conventions or the Covenant of Alfzar laid down, but at least a start.
Sean
Post a Comment