Writing in 1952, Arnold Wolfers, Professor of Political Science at Yale University, complained that “national security” was a symbol that left too much room for confusion to serve as a guiding principle for political advice or scientific analysis. He suggested that, as a first step in developing an analytical concept of the term, security should be considered, “in an objective sense, […] the absence of threats to acquired values, [and] in a subjective sense, the absence of fear that such values will be attacked.” After the end of the Cold War, security policy continued to be understood as a normative practice, namely as defending values. Today, defending values and the nation’s heritage is an important ingredient of homeland security as seen by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and reflected in the “Homeland Security Vision” put forward in the 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review:

"A homeland that is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards, where American interests, aspirations, and way of life can thrive."

There is an emerging consensus that homeland security is focused on a compre­hensive approach, across sectors and tiers of government, driven by a value-based vision that includes a multiphase, multicapability framework with an emphasis on:

* preparedness and the purpose of achieving a resilient nation in an all-hazards perspective, based on risk-management;
* securing borders as well as facilitating lawful flow of people, goods, and information across borders;
* a whole-of-community approach in which homeland security becomes a collective societal responsibility and is regarded as the common creation of a public good;
* delivering security to both the public and private sector, as well as actively including the private sector in the creation of security as a public good; and
* working internationally to realize its broad yet mission-based objectives.

The emerging consensus also includes the view that homeland security is not only about safeguarding borders, infrastructures, and societies, but also about securing values and way of life. Hence, that security needs to be weighed against other values, such as liberty and freedom, but also accountability and delibera­tion.[…]

The emerging consensus further includes that homeland security differs from national security in that the latter seeks to deter an attack on the country and respond to the aggressor in case an attack occurs. Homeland security, in con­trast, cannot deter those who want to threaten, if not eliminate, our way of life because they do not have those rational and strategic purposes that national secu­rity concepts have typically seen adversaries guided by. In addition, homeland security is about capabilities to respond and recover internally, a responsibility that had been given to the civil defense sector during the era of Cold War national security. Homeland security integrates those capabilities, making it an endeavor directed at keeping societies and citizens safe and secure.