Is safety being used for control? In many contexts, ‘safety’ is being raised as a reason for greater ‘safeguards’ leading to greater mechanisms for control.
‘Safety Third’ is the title of a very insightful and thought provoking piece by Charles Eisenstein, which you can access at this link: https://charleseisenstein.substack.com/p/safety-third. Do read! You can also access at this think an audio version of the essay. It is well worth it.
FEAR is the complicit factor in safety. We know from psychologists how effective the use of fear can be in eliciting desired behaviours, especially if done so that the potential ‘victims’ are unaware of the behavioural techniques being used, as during the Covid lockdown times (see our separate post, “Open letter to Rishi Sunak condemns the use of unethical psychological techniques“). Many writers have written about the ‘Culture of Fear’ – as is the title of one of Frank Furedi’s books, or another of his books, ‘How Fear Works: Culture of Fear in the 21st Century’. Schools and teachers are being hammered with safeguarding judgements by OFSTED, aware that many parents with become very fearful if they hear that their children are not being kept safe, even though everyday life at the school contradicts such judgement. One former OFSTED inspector saying he has incontrovertible evidence that the inspectorate is using ‘safeguarding’ for downgrading schools and forcing them into Multi-Academy Trusts (i.e. businesses set up to ‘manage’ schools, turning education into corporate businesses). See Guardian article here.
It is a complex issue, as it is not only an unethical and irresponsible method to be used in underhand ways, without full transparency and consent by the public affected. But it is a question to ask ourselves as individuals: why are we so fearful? Why are we full of anxieties? Can we take this in hand, individually, more consciously? Thus is also becomes a self-development issue. Safety becomes then also a question of inner security, confidence, in each one of us. A willingness to face the unknown without fear.
We often hear the expression, ‘Safety First’, used in health and safety audits and extolled by government. But is it a right assessment? Is it actually, dare we say, inhuman to think in such terms? We heard from Matt Hancock during the so-called Covid Epidemic that we should stop hugging, stop shaking hands, that we should keep a ‘social distance’. All in the name of safety — safety first! But all those recommendations are in themselves inhuman. It has been shown by many psychological studies how essential hugging, physical contact, social nearness are for us to retain our sanity and humanity. No wonder after lockdowns there has been a huge increase in depression, anxieties, suicides. And children are especially affected. It was criminal what we did to children in lockdown times, all in the name of ‘safety first’. What about love and trust? Such concepts became quite foreign in the government and mainstream media tirades. ‘Safety’ needs to take its place within a much larger context. Perhaps third place is appropriate! But read Charles Eisenstein’s essay. You will think differently afterwards!
It’s time to rethink, to retake humanity, and re-find our sense of self in its soul and spiritual dimensions. Only then will we be able to move forward with the concept of ‘safety’ in its right place. And not falling for it being used in the wrong places!
For those interested in pursuing the matter of safety in relation to fear, do look at Frank Furedi’s books, one of them pictured here. They are an eye opener, looking at fear within a cultural perspective, and how our perceptions have changed through the course of history, and especially now in the 21st century.
