The Journal Of Political Studies Volume I, No. 2, Jan. 2014 | Page 17

83

had not committed, ‘haloed’ (a physical incapacitating headband) and sent to the Hall of Containment to serve out his sentence. The next sequence follows PreCrime’s John Anderton (Tom Cruise) on a late night run through a dystopian 2054 Washington, D.C. cityscape where video advertisements promote PreCrime for an upcoming national referendum. One ad flashes “Life”, “Liberty” and “Pursuit of Happiness” while a voice over proclaims, “That which keeps us safe, will also keep us free,” establishing the narrative framework for what unfolds.

VVThe plot involves Anderton being pursued for a murder he is thought to commit in 36 hours. While this pursuit of one of its own takes place, a representative of the Justice Department, Detective Witwer (Colin Farell) is on hand to investigate the potential for human error within the system before the national roll-out. In the end Anderton chooses not to commit the crime he is being hunted down for. Instead, Burgess (Max Von Sydow), the Head of PreCrime, is the guilty party that has set Anderton up by manipulating the process. The climax occurs on a hotel patio reception for PreCrime’s approval to go national, when the antagonists face each other. The ‘precogs’, the triumvirate of deified visionaries around whom the system is based foresee the murder of Anderton by Burgess. When confronted with the facts and the knowledge that the ‘precogs’ will have already seen him commit the murder Anderton asks him, “What is it worth, just one more murder?” before the impassioned appeal, “You can still choose.” The end comes with Burgess electing to take his own life, disproving PreCrime, versus proving PreCrime’s infallibility by committing the crime envisioned, and suffering the consequences.

VVThe similarities to the Bush Doctrine of Preemption are disturbing, for example the Supreme Court case Rumsfeld v Padilla (2004). Padilla was alleged to have been involved in a plot to detonate a dirty bomb within the contiguous US. His constitutional right of habeas corpus was indefinitely suspended and he was incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The majority decision of the Court went, “[what is] at stake in this case is nothing less than the essence of a free society…For if this nation is to remain true to the ideals symbolized by its flag, it must not wield the tools of tyranny even to resist an assault by the forces of tyranny.” [1] When the Bush Administration was asked for comment, Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz replied, “There was no plan. We stopped this man in the initial planning stages.”[2] As in the movie, errors of judgment may occur. Imminent is a fixed term – it has little to no temporal elasticity. Something will always be imminent until it is not. Burgess’ suicide illustrates that choice potentiality exists right up until action occurs. The ‘death’ of Burgess answers the question of martyrdom mentioned above; that which does not represent an ending, but rather a continuing tangent to the whole which, through reflection, obtains an uncontested sovereignty unto itself by being an indisputable act of opposition of some form.