Robots to the Slaughter

 

    When compared to the debut of automatons as entertainment, modern robots play a far more pivotal role in our current society. Robots have been integrated into our manufacturing and agriculture; even the healthcare industry is witnessing a shift towards automation with the use of robotically-assisted surgery and companion robots. From the food we eat to the products we consume, humanity is becoming increasingly reliant on the presence of robots. While it's not inherently terrible to embrace this era of efficient tech, there arises a concerning question when considering the role robotics plays in our society. At what point will robot usage spread from production to destruction?

    Robots are creations moulded to serve a singular core purpose. Unlike humans, they are not multifaceted by nature; robots do not discover or overcome. They remain finite in their creative capabilities, where humanity is infinite. And it's because of this coded focus that robots possess a ruthless efficiency that humans cannot fully imitate. This efficiency is one reason for the meat industry's modernization; the age of people butchering their own meat for dinner has come to an end; there are now millions of hungry mouths to be fed. As populations soar higher and higher, there grows an ever-larger demand for sustenance. In response, meat production evolved to become quicker, cheaper, more convenient. A conveyor belt of slaughter was created, spanning from birth to righteous execution, a cycle of meat that continues ceaselessly without any need for human intervention. In the pursuit of efficiency, there are fewer and fewer people involved in the action of meat-processing. It becomes terrifyingly easy for society to distance itself from the origins of every packaged and processed slice of deli meat that lines the shelves of grocery stores; the sight becomes common and mundane. 

    In a world where we are constantly pursuing greater heights of innovation, it isn't unusual to forget where we began. In the future, if we were to manufacture robots to act as weapons and fight wars in our stead, we would be making the act of war as ordinary as a slab of processed ham. It would become too easy of a choice to make if, rather than ourselves, we were sending man-made metal machines to the frontlines instead. That is where the danger of extreme automation comes from and is why we cannot create robots that are meant to be weaponized; it separates us from the consequences of our actions and allows us to perpetuate violence while hiding behind the excuse of not wreaking any destruction with our own two hands. If war becomes commonplace, then a warzone becomes just like any other city; we would have lost the meaning of the word "violence". If the number of casualties rising on a screen was counting the bodies of machinery instead of mankind, no longer would those numbers be a creation lost but a pawn sacrificed for some convoluted greater cause. It's no longer a battle but a game of chess, and that is horrific; we become desensitized from what is happening before our very eyes and by extension, grow blind to the people around us as well. We cannot ask robots to fight our battles, humanity has the rights to progress and improve but that does not grant us permission to begin losing ourselves in the process. The lines between automation and complacency should never be blurred, and it should never become easy to send something to its death.