It is imperative that the civil society occupies the space in the agenda of the public security, perceiving that the lack of social participation in construction of one security politics citizen provokes the maintenance of the inherited apparatus of the models previous politicians who more do not answer to the necessities of our social structure. The social participation is important so that it has changes. It is imperative that let us wake up for our paper while possibilitadores of changes. Mazzuoli 2 makes reference the Hannah Arendt, to show that the citizenship is the product of the construction of ‘ ‘ collective conscience, that requires the access to the space pblico.’ ‘ It is interesting also to be able to notice the scaling of the violence on two indissociveis aspects: subjective objectives and. In the field of the objetividade we have the concrete data of the violence. Whereas in the subjectivity, we have the unreliability sensation. Ahead of the presented indissociveis data above, we notice that the artifices that we impose in them as ‘ ‘ solucionadores’ ‘ they are always inside of a imediatista character, focused and they do not answer to cerne of the question of the security guard public that we desire. Today, in them we enclausuramos in condominiums, armored cars, we close in them in streets with gratings, shoppings, place private security and we pay expensive therefore, in such a way financial how much socially.
To the one closing in them, searching in them to protect ‘ ‘ of outro’ ‘ , we do not perceive that we provoke more distanciamento of this another one. Such distanciamento only increases the estranhamento between the people, cooperating with the scaling of the violence and in guaranteeing the protection for it are not of these ‘ ‘ fortalezas’ ‘ , when at some moment we need to leave them or to desire to usufruct of the urban spaces. We also finish for in them becoming violators of rights, over all the right of the other to go and to come, when this does not find ticket in a street that was closed ‘ ‘ for the security of its moradores’ ‘. We do not obtain to perceive that with such attitudes, we will not reach cerne of the question of the collective security, that is structural and necessary to be treated in the level of State, in the level of public politics, not of isolated and private actions. What we need is to be participant! Utopia? Abstraction? Perhaps, but she is necessary that let us understand the participation as basic to become ‘ ‘ andar’ ‘ the society.
The institutions that we have are reflected of the society that we are. We can also choose to be of it are, and to leave that they manage our lives as to desire, but thus, we will lose the chance to be protagonists of our history, opening the hand of the right citizen to participate of the decisions that affect our lives directly.