Yasemin Unal
Professor Mark Shirk
GVPT200FC
7 October 2013
To begin, ontological security is
what promotes and creates a sense of identity for citizens within a state.
Thus, a sense of being is established through community ties, common religion,
culture, language, and relations. The individual can feel that they are a part
of something bigger, ultimately contributing and sacrificing more out of their
lives for the better of their state. This is essentially how economies and nations
grow to become strong and stable, with a united workforce of citizens with
common goals. Without a strong backbone that is created through a sense of
ontological security, a state is an empty shell with no vigor. Therefore, being
a state would have no meaning without representing an identity or common ideal.
So without a sense of belonging, an individual will not be physiologically
bound to the continuation and success of their state. These are some reasons
why the ontological factor of creating a sense of identity is important for the
citizens of a secure state.
Furthermore , through ontological
security citizens form their own "way of life" and establish a sense
of what the daily norm is. This element can be overlooked in significance when
it comes to the issue of security. However I would argue that when an
individual feels secure and safe, they will contribute more to their society.
If one were to analyze states in which citizens are the most ontologically
secure, one would discover that these states are the most culturally and
economically established. Consequently, setting a normal day's routine of what
is expected, promotes a feeling of assurance and security among citizens. This
then leads to societies achieving their full potentials, because they are not
preoccupied with physiological threats.
Accordingly, when this sense of
the daily norm is broken and ontological security is threatened, citizens can
find themselves panicked, emotionally unstable, and in chaos. It is important
to note that physiological harm can also be critical. If a societies sense of
security is disrupted, then the individuals will be affected in numerous ways.
A prime example of mass hysteria that results from an attack to ontological
security would be the American society after the 9/11 attacks. Since the public
did not know the exact reasons of why they were attacked, or who attacked them,
the population was physiologically affected. This resulted in a questioning of identity and purpose.
In the final analysis, it is my
argument that the ontological security of a state is an important element that should
not be oversimplified. The psychological condition of citizens help to
determine a state's overall achievements. Ontological security is vital for a
state because it establishes a sense of identity for citizens, creates a sense
of norm, and when that sense of norm is altered the side effects experienced as
a society is great.
I completely agree that a threat to a state's ontological security worse than threats to human or physical security. When civillians feel that their identity and ideals have been attacked, rather than just their country or resources, it hits much harder. Like in 9/11, as you mention, the attacks hit the country so hard not only because they had been physically attacked,but also because the terrorists posed a direct threat on American identity, western values, democracy and our way of life.
ReplyDeleteOntological security is definitely something that is not often thought of because we are so used to having our beliefs and our ways of life protected and respected. As Shiran said above, 9/11 was a huge impact on America's ontological security because it was something that we were not expecting to be affected. We obviously weren't expecting a terrorist attack, and it affected us physically just as bad, but there is something completely disarming about doubting American customs and democracy that came with this attack.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that a person's ontological security is beneficial to the state as well because it is what helps run businesses, corporations and our country as a whole. Every citizen has a way of life and the citizens are the ones that make our country what it is. So if that way of life is taken, then our country also gets taken.
You make a great argument supporting ontological security by pointing out that if a citizens "way of life is taken, then our country also gets taken".
DeleteI completely agree with your argument that if an individual feels secure, then they will contribute more to their society economically and culturally. It goes back to the realist theory that physical survival is the most important thing, and once a state is secure, they can begin to develop in other areas. if people aren't constantly worried about their security than they can be productive and help build society in other ways. I do have a question though, when you said in your post, "If a societies sense of security is disrupted, then the individuals will be affected in numerous ways." what did you mean by this? What are the numerous ways which individuals will be affected?
ReplyDeleteI was trying to say that if individuals feel as if their personal ways of life or norm are being threatened, then that will lead to chaos among society. Also, your post made me realize how ontological security could relate to the realist theory. You made a good point, saying that "physical survival is the most important thing".
Delete