This saturation has been accompanied by the emergence of a minor industry generating ideas about how to define and redefine security, how to defend and improve it, how to widen and deepen it, how to civilise and democratise it. In this book Mark Neocleous takes an entirely different approach and offers the first fully fledged critique of security. Challenging the common assumption that treats security as an unquestionable good, Neocleous explores the ways in which security has been deployed towards a vision of social order in which state power and liberal subjectivity have been inscribed into human experience. Treating security as a political technology of liberal order-building, engaging with the work of a wide range of thinkers, and ranging provocatively across a range of subject areas - security studies and international political economy; history, law and political theory; international relations and historical sociology - Neocleous explores the ways in which individuals, classes and the state have been shaped and ordered according to a logic of security. In so doing, he uncovers the violence which underlies the politics of security, the ideological circuit between security and emergency powers, and the security fetishism dominating modern politics. They try to act like we arenay real live human beings.
|Published (Last):||14 October 2007|
|PDF File Size:||18.13 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.86 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Boyd To cite this article: Christopher M. In that sense it is meant as an unmasking of the ideology and a defetishising of the system of security. He exposes a legal fetishism wherein the normality of law becomes an opaque answer to the violence of emergency powers while its own relationship to violence remains unquestioned. The emergency becomes normal, the exception becomes the rule; but more than this, however, for rather than coming from outside the rule of law, emergency powers are seen to emerge from the exercise of law as violence.
At this point Neocleous appears to move from an historical-theoretical modality to an activist one. Indeed the security discourse stifles the only real solution: the reintroduction of a possibility of revolutionary violence, outwith the law, which threatens the law by its mere existence but which he sees as an avenue having been largely ignored by the left.
This argument relies heavily on a detailed American historical narrative and, especially in relation to the discussion of US-Soviet tensions, seems at times to generalise too much Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 26 November from this particular situation. It also provides an interesting reading of international interventionism in the name of national security, whether in the form of aid or attack, as being an extension of the domestic anti-radicalisation aims of social security measures.
He rejects the discussion of privatisation, which he argues is overdetermined by its unconscious acceptance of liberal assumptions about the role of the state and even the public-private distinction itself. An important part of this industry for Neocleous is the production of ideology by academia, particularly within the social sciences. His argument is that, rather than living up to their self- image as being sceptical of, and at a distance from, the security industry, the social sciences reinforce its projects at a structural level.
Finally, he points out that one of the few aspects of the state which is secured by neoliberalism is its security apparatus, and argues that the aim of the left should be the overthrow of the security industry and security state together, in a single campaign. Book Reviews Although the focus on particularly American examples sometimes limits the scope of his thesis, and there is perhaps too much space taken from analysis for the exposition of historical events in general, Critique of Security provides much insightful analysis and Neocleous writes in a highly engaging style.
He is at his best when dealing with the political nature of security, carving out his theory of the state-capital complicity, and attacking academia from within. He sees the only solution being to reject the security discourse utterly and replace it with one which is not the product of reification-as-forgetting; one which sees the reality of security as an illusory solution to an imagined problem.
Unfortunately, Critique of Security is silent on what this new discourse could be. Perhaps a sequel is in order. The central argument of Marxism After Modernity is the degree to which postmodern culture, under the domination of capitalist digital information technology, altered the presuppositions of a 19th-century proletarian politics and a 19th-century historical materialism.
The movie, TV or newspaper image is now totally divorced from the real; is merely a simulacra acting as a hour publicity deception to seduce the population into a galactic consumerism. The idea of a public sphere, first seen by Kant and Hegel as a space for Related Papers.
CRITIQUE OF SECURITY NEOCLEOUS PDF
Samuro Securith the same theme, see Michael Renner, Fighting for Survival: Indeed, the question of how the concept of security can be expanded, broadened or deepened has been the central debate within international relations theory in the s. For Hobbes the search for security underpins the creation of a sovereign power: Click here to sign up. Such arguments have dominated debates within the European Union during Against security. Parallax rated it really liked it Aug 11, In his moves surrounding prerogative Locke essentially identifies the function of the sovereign as the production of security. The Image of Balance. From the Publisher via CrossRef no proxy link. Alicia Furness rated it really liked it Mar 12, Between an Executive Power in being, with such a Prerogative, and a legislative that depends upon his will for their convening, there can be no Judge on Earth: Far from being a spontaneous order of the kind found in liberal mythology, civil society is the security project par excellence.
Critique of security
Boyd To cite this article: Christopher M. In that sense it is meant as an unmasking of the ideology and a defetishising of the system of security. He exposes a legal fetishism wherein the normality of law becomes an opaque answer to the violence of emergency powers while its own relationship to violence remains unquestioned. The emergency becomes normal, the exception becomes the rule; but more than this, however, for rather than coming from outside the rule of law, emergency powers are seen to emerge from the exercise of law as violence. At this point Neocleous appears to move from an historical-theoretical modality to an activist one. Indeed the security discourse stifles the only real solution: the reintroduction of a possibility of revolutionary violence, outwith the law, which threatens the law by its mere existence but which he sees as an avenue having been largely ignored by the left.
Critique of Security
At the dawn of the new American presidency, we do not yet know to what extent the security paradigm of the George W. Bush era will remain in place. Critique of Security is a study of the dominant paradigm, discourse, and cult of security. It illustrates the extent to which the notion of security has been exploited to bolster executive authoritarianism in Western liberal democracies, particularly in the United States and the United Kingdom. Mark Neocleous shows in his opening chapter that in classical liberal thought, security and not liberty has been the overriding principle. The discourse and techniques of security are central to conceptions of liberty and of the rule of law.