Starting from the analytical premise that private military and security companies are agents of influence and power in the security domain, this paper addresses the societal consequences of this development. Operating with the concept of fear as an ordering principle in liberal societies, this paper seek to analyze how the commodification of both spreading fear and amending fear have effects beyond the intended consequences of military and security privatization. Drawing upon work by Michael C. Williams, Corey Robin, Joanna Bourke and the Copenhagen School of securitization theory, the concept of fear is seen to be a novel and fruitful starting point for analysis. Securitization theory, it will be argued, is founded upon the concept of fear through its function as a powerful instrument in order to control behavior, and thus to shape policies. In other words, it is fear-aversion, individually as well as collectively held, that makes the dynamics of securitization possible. In the nexus of securitization theory and private security and military provision, where increasingly individually defined security demands meets individualized security provision, the industry’s hypothesized ability to gain heavy influence on our contemporary security discourses is being captured.
