Solving the Security Puzzle, with Security in Context

You might’ve seen elsewhere that I’ll be joining Security in Context, a transnational organization of scholars and policy folks doing what I consider god’s work—trying to understand sources of global insecurity so that we can make a more peaceful, egalitarian, and democratic world. You know, durable security.

Check out this short 2-minute video, which explains what they’re about. It’s masterfully done, and really compelling.

What they do has been the mission underlying my research and public-intellectual stuff for several years now, so it’s great to “squad up” with them.

Not leaving my day job, but I’ll be co-director for their “Multipolarity, Great-Power Competition, and the Global South” project. I’m psyched about this because we’ve long needed a “bridging the gap” initiative for critical scholars.

As I say in the video where I sit down with their podcast:

Our investment in security seems to be inversely correlated to the outcome of security.

We’re spending more money and resources than ever on this thing we call “national security,” and yet not only does the world feel perpetually insecure; it feels like insecurity is getting worse for most of us. 

As an aside, ever since high school I’ve been plagued by this voice in my head challenging me, “Whose side are you on?” It originally came to me from hip-hop, I think, but over the course of my life the voice would pop back up intermittently, usually triggered by witnessing some injustice or another. The past decade or so the voice has gotten louder and louder, and by 2020 I couldn’t turn it off.

It’s never been about America versus [insert bad guy] or Left versus Right or democracy versus autocracy. It’s about oppressor and oppressed. Answering “Whose side are you on?” is about trying to take more seriously who is harmed by what we do, and who benefits.

One way or another this voice has brought me to be preoccupied with relating security to workers, the margins, the subaltern, the periphery, whatever you want to call it—by the numbers it’s the majority both in America and globally.

But this is not a way of seeing that lends itself to easy answers. If anything, it complicates and historicizes everything. But when we think about foreign policy, especially the aspects of foreign policy dubbed “security,” we’re trained to think in an abstract way that often quite literally erases that majority.

I have a growing conviction that this has something to do with why insecurity is getting worse for most of us. And I’m betting that when it comes to this concern, Security in Context is on the right side.

Love/Thanks

Just a quick note to thank everyone showing love for this project. I should’ve opened up the option for paid subscriptions a long time ago. I’m enjoying the interaction with readers, and at this point it’s the newsletter that keeps the main Un-Diplomatic Podcast going financially. If you have suggestions for things to cover or prioritize here (or in the patron-only mini podcasts) let me know. ✌️