The quote Feldman uses from Agamben comes right at the start of his essay, as a tool to get people thinking. Thinking about things they probably never second guessed, as something maybe, they should take a closer look at. The quote he uses is this one, "While disciplinary power isolates and closes off territories, measures of security lead to an opening and globalization; while the law wants to prevent and prescribe. In a word, discipline wants to produce order, while security wants to guide disorder." This quote gets you thinking about security and the law perhaps in a scrutinous way you never have before, or at least it did for me. I never really gave a second thought to security and law and their major differences as Agamben discusses in his essay, "Security and Terror," and as Feldman thought was important enough to stick at the very start of his essay, "The Actuarial Gaze."

The difference between security and discipline and law, is slight but extremely significant. And it is because of the slightness of their differences that so many people today go on unquestioningly accepting the governments focus on security not realizing they are enabling the governing bodies to manipulate situations of emergency or chaos, such as happened on September 11th 2001. Not saying this is what happened for certain, but the government easily could have used the event of September 11h and the people fear and grief over it to get them to rally together and go to war, which later after gaining the peoples support to enter the war, the government completely changed and prolonged the purposes of the war and and who knows what other reasons they had for pushing us into the war all along. This is, I think, a good example of what Agamben talks about in relation to security in his essay. He talks about how security is used as a means to guide the situations of emergency and chaos that happen and attempt to 'control' them after they have already begun to happen. Taking stronger disciplinary actions and preventative measures would be Agamben's preferred approach to these situations. Why deal with trying to guide situations after they happened when you can take the upmost care to prevent them instead. As he says, "discipline wants to produce order, while security wants to guide disorder." 

On the other hand, how would it even be possible to prevent an emergency like September 11th in the first place. In some situations preventative measures and stronger disciplinary actions could be very possible, and beneficial to us, but how to prevent something other countries do to your country seems almost impossible to do. The preventative measures it would have took to stop these events would have had to occur many many years ago because these actions of terrorists and other people are results of years and years of histories and struggles between religions and races. So security seems to be the only option in cases like this September 11th and acts of terrorism. However I don't think it's impossible to be more careful about the ways in which the governing bodies are going about dealing with security. It is up to the people to be more active and more aware of the truth about what our government is really trying to do, and we have to stop believing everything we are told be the people over us without questioning it first. We should always be checking and double checking everything we are told for the truth. As Agamben states, "Nothing is therefore more important than a revision of the concept of security as the basic principle of state politics." In the future we will need to be increasingly careful of the differences between things like security and discipline, and how they are being used either to help us or to control us.