Rhys Machold Examines Global Homeland Security Through Power Networks, Colonial Legacies, and Counterterrorism Practices

When I first read Rhys Machold’s recent interview on how homeland security functions through global networks of power and colonial legacies, my immediate thought wasn’t about distant borders or overseas conflicts—it was about what’s happening right here in Chicago. As someone who’s spent years tracking how national security policies trickle down to affect neighborhood safety and civil liberties, I saw clear parallels between the transnational policing entanglements Machold describes in India and Palestine/Israel and the evolving security landscape in our own city. His work, rooted in years of research published through Stanford University Press and his role at the University of Glasgow, doesn’t just theorize about empire—it shows how those old power structures live on in today’s surveillance tech, counterterrorism funding, and police training exchanges that shape everyday life from the South Side to Rogers Park.

What Machold emphasizes—that modern homeland security isn’t just about stopping threats but about maintaining specific regimes of power—resonates deeply when you appear at Chicago’s recent history. The city has long been a testing ground for predictive policing algorithms, gang databases, and surveillance camera networks that disproportionately target Black and Brown communities. These aren’t isolated innovations. they’re part of what scholars call the “global circulation of police power,” where tactics developed in counterinsurgency operations abroad get adapted for urban control at home. Machold’s analysis of how colonial-era police functions—like intelligence gathering and population management—were repurposed for settler-colonial contexts helps explain why tools like facial recognition or stingray devices, initially marketed for counterterrorism, often end up monitoring protests over school closures or affordable housing developments.

This transnational flow isn’t theoretical. The web search results present Amnesty International’s 2025 report documenting how authoritarian practices intensified worldwide, with governments including India and the UK using counterterrorism laws to repress dissent—a pattern Machold’s research directly addresses. Meanwhile, the Policy Studies blog from Bristol University notes how colonial legacies in policing “continue to shape institutions of control” that reinforce social harms across the Global South. In Chicago, we see echoes of this in the way the Chicago Police Department’s Strategic Decision Support Centers (SDSCs) integrate license plate readers, gunshot detection, and social media monitoring—technologies often justified by homeland security grants but deployed in ways that raise serious concerns about racial profiling and chilling effects on free speech, particularly in neighborhoods like Englewood or Little Village where community trust in law enforcement remains fragile.

Machold’s engagement with Science and Technology Studies (STS) and actor-network theory (ANT) is especially relevant here. He doesn’t just see technology as neutral tools; he examines how they become entangled with political goals, economic interests, and historical power dynamics. That lens helps us understand why Chicago’s investment in ShotSpotter technology—funded partly through federal homeland security streams—has persisted despite audits showing minimal impact on solving violent crimes while generating thousands of false alerts that divert police resources. It’s not just about the gadgets; it’s about what those gadgets are *for* in practice: maintaining a particular vision of order that, as Machold argues, often serves to manage populations deemed threatening to existing power structures rather than addressing root causes of violence.

The second-order effects are significant. When cities like Chicago adopt security models influenced by counterinsurgency doctrines, we see budget shifts where mental health responders lose out to surveillance contracts; where school resource officers multiply while counselors face layoffs; where community-based violence interruption programs struggle for funding while police overtime budgets swell. Machold’s work invites us to ask: whose security are we actually building? And at what cost to democratic participation, especially when counterterrorism frameworks get applied to environmental protesters at Line 5 pipeline demonstrations or water protectors opposing industrial developments near Lake Michigan?

Given my background in analyzing how national security policies manifest at the municipal level—particularly through the lens of colonial continuities and technological determinism—if this trend impacts you in Chicago, here are the three types of local professionals you need to know about:

First, seek out Civil Rights Attorneys Specializing in Surveillance Litigation. Look for lawyers or firms with a proven track record challenging unlawful gang database inclusions, advocating for transparency in predictive policing algorithms, or litigating against Stingray device apply without warrants. They should understand both Illinois state privacy laws like the Geolocation Privacy Protection Act and how federal homeland security funding streams can enable local overreach.

Second, connect with Community Technology Stewards—not just generic IT consultants, but organizations or individuals who facilitate neighborhood groups conduct their own tech audits, demand algorithmic impact assessments from city agencies, or establish data cooperatives to counter municipal surveillance with community-owned alternatives. The best ones have worked with groups like the Chicago Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression or the Lucy Parsons Labs on concrete projects involving FOIA requests or participatory defense tech.

Third, engage Urban Security Anthropologists—researchers or practitioners who apply ethnographic methods to study how security technologies actually function on the ground. Unlike traditional criminologists focused solely on crime stats, these experts map how security measures affect daily routines, social trust, and public space usage. Prioritize those with fieldwork experience in Chicago neighborhoods and publications in journals like Critical Studies on Security (where Machold serves as Editor-in-Chief) or collaborations with local universities such as UIC’s Department of Criminology, Law and Justice.

Ready to find trusted professionals? Browse our complete directory of top-rated features,interviews,colonialism,counterterrorism,homelandsecurity,policing,zionism experts in the Chicago area today.