As fear rises and trust in public institutions crumbles, safety has quietly become a commodity available for purchase by the few, while the many are left increasingly exposed.
Across the modern world, from Brazil to South Africa to Beverly Hills, the same pattern emerges: When public safety falters, private security steps in. Rachel Kleinfeld’s “A Savage Order” documents how, in countries where public institutions weaken, the wealthy retreat behind walls, hire private guards and insulate themselves from the consequences of systemic breakdown.
In the United States today, private security guards now outnumber public police officers, with over 1.1 million private guards compared to roughly 660,000 police. Cities, corporations and even neighborhoods increasingly rely on private firms to patrol streets, monitor events and safeguard property.
At first glance, this privatization of safety might seem rational, an understandable response to rising crime rates, political instability or stretched police forces. But both modern evidence and ancient wisdom warn: Privatized protection is not a true solution. It is a symptom of imbalance.
Laozi’s insight from two millennia ago remains urgent today. Accumulating wealth and fortifying it against the world may seem to create security, but it often produces greater vulnerability. Kleinfeld’s research shows how private security systems widen inequality, erode public trust and delay the reforms needed to rebuild effective, accountable institutions. When elites can wall themselves off from insecurity, they lose the incentive to push for systemic change, leaving the broader public even more exposed.
This trend is increasingly visible in the United States. In affluent areas like Beverly Hills and Chicago’s Fulton Market District, private security patrols supplement public police forces, offering a second layer of protection for those who can pay. Meanwhile, cities like New Orleans, where police shortages have left residents waiting hours for emergency responses, see poorer neighborhoods left without alternatives.
Downtown districts often rely on privately funded guards while surrounding areas face growing insecurity. The result is not just unequal safety; it is a fractured civic fabric, where trust, accountability and collective responsibility weaken.
Importantly, this is not a condemnation of individuals who seek protection. In a society where public institutions falter, seeking additional security is a natural and often necessary response. But systemically, when safety becomes something that must be purchased, it ceases to function as a right and begins functioning as a privilege.
Real protection is relational, not transactional. It grows from trust, not walls. It requires a commitment to shared responsibility, not just to individual insulation.
We can already see glimpses of a different path. Community-based safety initiatives, violence-interruption teams and public investments in alternative crisis response units show that it is possible to rebuild safety around cooperation rather than fragmentation. Strengthening public institutions, restoring accountability and ensuring equitable access to protection are not just moral imperatives—they are practical necessities for societies that hope to endure.
When safety is treated as a product, the bonds that hold communities together begin to fray. Both ancient wisdom and modern research make clear: True security cannot be hoarded, bought or built behind gates. It must be shared. It must be rooted in trust, nurtured through fair and accountable institutions and made accessible to all.
If we continue down the path of privatized protection and public neglect, the walls we build today will become the ruins we inherit tomorrow. But if we choose to reinvest in collective safety, grounded in equity, transparency and shared responsibility, we can still rebuild a system where security is not for sale, but a common good.
This MFP Voices opinion essay reflects the personal opinion of its author(s). The column does not necessarily represent the views of the Mississippi Free Press, its staff or board members. To submit an opinion for the MFP Voices section, send up to 1,200 words and sources fact-checking the included information to voices@mississippifreepress.org. We welcome a wide variety of viewpoints.
