Seven Questions for Existential Risk Studies

Existential security and the governance challenge: Confronting the antinomies of securitisation

“…But making such claims also necessitate engaging scholars who have highlighted the unequal power relationships among those who attempt to speak security, asking critical questions about the audiences thereby empowered, and assessing the consequence of securitisation when “humanity” is invoked as the referent object (e.g. Hansen, 2000; Sundaram et al, 2022). It is to these dilemmas I take up Nathan's work's invitation to engage.…”

“…More critically, successful macrosecuritisation may purport to speak for humanity but, in so doing, silence the actors or communities most likely to be suffering from insecurity. It may ignore their voices in the governance arrangements (Hansen, 2000; Sundaram et al, 2022) or reproduce power differentials, inequalities, racist or patriarchal structures, or even genocidal indifference. This worried Nathan in a way captured well in Belfield's contribution here.…”

“…Perhaps, an alternative might offer another way forward: “repoliticisation” of macrosecuritisations that brings the debate back into the political arena, which might both motivate responsibility of the kind Nathan craved and create or force space for a plurality of voices to speak security. Nathan might have appreciated this kind of provocation to securitisation theory that offers a middle, and I would argue necessary, if uncertain, way forward (Inoue, 2018; Kramarz et al, 2021; Paterson et al, 2021; Sundaram et al, 2022). That we have lost Nathan's voice in this important debate is a great loss to all.…”

Nathan Sears: “… in the midst of catastrophe”

“…The field of existential risk is still grappling with these issues that Nathan reflected upon so early and with such humility (Cremer & Kemp, 2021;Sundaram et al, 2022).…”

“…Different communities may prioritize different threats and imagine different means of response. Thinking about “existential risk” as a “global priority” demands a truly global discussion.The field of existential risk is still grappling with these issues that Nathan reflected upon so early and with such humility (Cremer & Kemp, 2021; Sundaram et al, 2022).…”