A double-check of phenomena, symptoms and tactics of (in-)security within objective social and subjective private systems. Uncertainties, fears, as generators of increased needs for security: where do they come from, how are they produced and sold? This means that the question of fear and security is to be posed in the context of both socio-political and private intersubjective systems of relationships. Produced self-insecurity - which escalates in the state of "feeling threatened" - as a symptom of hysterical social systems? Religious and cultural norms as a safety net? Or hysterical symptoms of insecurity and tactics symbolizing fears of a loss of identity, fears of a loss of control, or denial?

The phenomenon of growing needs for security permeates all levels and contexts of society. The illusion of absolute security was simultaneously destroyed and reinstalled by the events of September 11th. Vulnerabilities were revealed and measures taken to recreate seeming invulnerability, the state of "before". Lost "innocence" was to be regained, reconquered, at all costs with the pretext of extreme security measures and actions. Security as the primary motto. For imagining the pseudo ideal state of "before". Security as an instrument for the restitution of an invulnerability that had never existed. Absurd? An imaginary quest for the unattainable object of desire, the phantasm of security?

Control madness legalized through the loss of security propagated by the media. Restrictions of freedom as security measures declared necessary for the benefit of all? All in the name of democracy to protect one's own, the "only right" system? The banner of democracy as an often empty formula, the defense of which justifies every action? What is felt to be so mutually threatening? Islamic identity, threatened by western economic dominance and prepotency - western identity threatened by the radical demand for attention on the part of those excluded? Both marked by hyped fears of loss and the propaganda of insecurity?

A religious social system like Islam is, in part, so successful as a model of identity, because internal provisions for security, based on traditional rules of behavior and role definitions, are not only raised in value again, but also posited as absolute. A secure pattern of identity in contrast with the omnipresent western economic and cultural principles, explicitly taking a position opposite the overpowering dominance of the west that is perceived as a moral uncertainty/threat.

State-religious controls fundamentally intervening in private areas. What is private thus becomes even more private, secretly private, an often contradictory zone strictly separated from public life. A religious value system as the opposite pole to the capitalist system? A system, however, which takes recourse, for its part, to its western values or judgments? Western fundamentalism, in other words capitalism indoctrinated through Protestantism or Catholicism, declares its number one need for security through barricading against the outside: external security, property, must be insured. Security is a private matter, is negotiated, bought and sold, is an economic factor within the propagated system of insecurity. The western security check, state intervention in the private sphere, is based on the anonymous, abstract and increasingly impenetrable use of security techniques.
Technique instead of religion as a means of control? The electronic eye of God? Surveillance techniques instead of social security?

The other is the propagated, named insecurity. Religion, culture, economy as pseudo security systems promising protection from the other, whereby precisely this protection can be the matter of threat for the other. Produced insecurity, mass uncertainty in order to realize ideological, political and economic interests? Insecurity broadcast through the media in order to imagine, in the name of security, the desire for the symbolic father, for maximum control and the function of protection, and justify the real, authoritarian "commandments" of security? Methods of exclusion as a tool of pseudo security and proof of security as a means of pacification? Or are they not indeed a symptom of this produced hysterical insecurity?