Journal of Human Security | 2014 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | Pages 1–3

DOI: 10.12924/johs2014.10010001

ISSN: 1835-3800

Editorial

Editorial for Journal of Human Security Volume 10

Sabina W. Lautensach

1, 2, 3

1

Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela's death on 5 December 2013

and his funeral ten days later were taken as an oc-

casion in the global media to discuss the merits of

political leadership for human security, with occasional

comments on its pitfalls. This particular leader is not

the most politically safe object of discussion, as, for a

long time, he openly advocated civil disobedience and

resistance, initially of the non-violent kind, but later

becoming violent. Predictably, the local hegemon

reacted with great brutality and sweeping measures

Mandela's ascendance to the presidency in 1994.

Mr Mandela's example illustrates how responsible

leaders of political resistance movements must assess

the centres of power without any illusions about the

innate legitimacy of sovereign governments. They

must navigate carefully among the institutions of

power, their directives, laws, and enforcement agen-

cies, always seeking maximum damage to the holders

of power and minimal harm to the rest of the citi-

zenry. If they lose sight of that balance, they cease to

is the only institution powerful enough—and morally

legitimised—to counter anarchic movements and the

threat to human security such movements supposedly

pose. Yet the ethics of civil resistance clearly holds the

moral high ground in cases where the hegemon has

abandoned procedural justice and widely violates

human rights in his (precedents are mostly male) in-

creasingly desperate efforts to preserve the power

imbalance on which his position depends.

In our recently published textbook on human secu-

that the moral stance of the law abiding citizen loses

its normative eminence under those conditions.

Instead, virtue is exemplified by the counter-hegem-

onic activist, from the common German citizens who

hid Jewish refugees in their attics all the way to

people like Nelson Mandela. In the ensuing struggle,

'terrorism' becomes an obligatory strategic instrument

on either side in the eyes of the other. And yet, if the

revolution is successful, the ultimate blame goes en-

tirely to the former hegemon, and the leadership

© 2014 by the authors; licensee Librello, Switzerland. This open access article was published

under a Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

whether they were violently deposed or peacefully

died in office or retirement, end up being judged more

harshly by posterity. No-one, I hope, would think of

advertising a Pinochet or Battista as a model leader to

students.

The upshot is that leadership is by no means an ab-

solute ideal, contrary to the many educational pro-

ally legitimate laws and those that perpetuate

injustice, government by the people and government

by plutocrats, are blurred by the corporate media and

entertainment industries to the extent that raises

some concerns about the effects of their message in

the consciousness of future generations. This is why

the Mandelas of history are so eminently important:

they are the counterexamples; they show us what

true leadership should and could be, and that bad

leaders are worth fighting against. The absence of

security from a descriptive parameter to a normative

criterion of moral excellence—the criterion that

distinguishes good leadership. Witness its status as a

popular ideal in present-day South Africa.

Counter-hegemonic leadership, of course, attracts

formidable risks. During the second week of February

2013 a mullah in Yemen spoke out publicly against Al

Qaida. A day later, when he and two other members

of his congregation were meeting with two Al Qaida

members to discuss the issue, all five were incinerated

Not even the boycott of the mainstream media can

obfuscate the idealistic accomplishments, personal risks,

and excellent leadership shown in these examples.

In contrast, the primary reason for the absence of

leadership is its attractiveness to the multitudes of the

risk averse. This gives rise to the phenomenon of

immoral consensus, where ordinary people conform

with views and practices that clearly contradict their

own values. Immoral consensus sometimes goes as

far as making people refrain from showing support for

particularly evident with examples of unconventional

moral leadership shown by abolitionists of slavery,

suffragettes demanding the vote for women, animal

welfare activists protesting abuses in the food and

cosmetics industry, and protectors of the last stands

of old growth forests. Who has not heard of the dis-

paraging labels of nigger lovers, tomboys, treehuggers,

such failure is evident in my home town in the lack of

any community-owned recycling operation. At the

regional level it is commonly evident in the sell-out of

precious natural resources to overseas corporate takers

at prices that reflect neither their cultural value nor the

ecological costs of their extraction. At the national level

it is evident, for example, in the failure of govern-

ments to enact adequate protection of consumers

against harmful food products and additives, against

the interests of their corporate suppliers. Early in 2010

the choice to end one's life. The government refused

to take the lead on proactive health care, an undis-

puted human security good.

At the global level the absence of responsible lead-

ership seems quite the rule. The global trafficking in

arms, drugs and people can be effectively combatted

only through initiatives based on counter-hegemonic

leadership. Restraining the emission of greenhouse

gases and other pollutants, fairly distributing scarce

resources, testing and restriction of drugs and house-

those projects are not making adequate progress.

Counterexamples where such leadership makes a

wealth of difference, as in the case of Captain Paul

Watson and his Sea Shepherds fighting ecocide and

cruel exploitation of the world's oceans, occur rarely

but shine brightly as examples of how much better a

place this world could be if we had more responsible

leadership.

The failure of responsible global governance some-

times takes grotesque proportions. Negotiations

of minerals and hydrocarbons. We are mystified by

the excitement about more fossil fuel deposits. They

cannot burn them, can they? Or rather, if they do get

burned it makes no difference who does the burning.

This example illustrates how the absence of respon-

sible leadership leads to a failure of governance, to

the detriment of all.

and their students who are practising unflagging lead-

ership in the aforementioned positive ways, and I hope

with all my heart that ultimately their causes will carry

the day.

Have a peaceful and happy New Year 2014!

Best wishes,

Vienna, Austria: Caesarpress; 2013. Available from:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/123123994/Human-Secu-

rity-in-World-Affairs-Problems-and-Opportunities-Pre-

view-Alexander-K-Lautensach-Sabina-W-Lautensach-

eds (accessed on 18 December 2013).