dc.contributor.author | Shammas, Victor Lund | |
dc.contributor.author | Sandset, Tony Joakim | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-02-13T12:08:57Z | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-02-17T13:31:02Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-02-13T12:08:57Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-02-17T13:31:02Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Shammas VL, Sandset T. Reproduction and the welfare state: Notes on Norwegian biopolitics. Nordic Journal of Social Research. 2020 | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 1892-2783 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1892-2783 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1892-2783 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10642/8125 | |
dc.description.abstract | Norway has long been considered to be a bastion of social democracy due to its strong, protective, decommodifying welfare state. However, with the recent rise of neoliberalism and right-wing populist politics across the West, this Northern European society has gradually shifted from Keynesian Fordism to a moderate form of neoliberalism. This political-economic pivot has also resulted in a transformation of what Foucault termed biopolitics: a politics concerned with life itself. In early 2019, leading politicians in Norway’s centre-right coalition government placed the problem of the declining fertility rate on the national agenda and framed the problem of biological reproduction in ways particular to their political-ideological perspectives. The Conservative Party discussed reproduction in terms of producerism, or the problem of supplying the welfare state with labouring, tax-paying citizens. The Progress Party emphasised ethnonational exclusion, engaging in racial denigration with the aim to ensure the reproduction of ‘ethnic Norwegians’. The Christian Democrats highlighted a conservative Christian ‘right to life’ topos amidst growing secularisation and pluralism. All three parties signalled a turn from traditional social-democratic ideologies. Neoliberalism has proven to be malleable, able to fuse with a wide range of biopolitical programmes including moral exhortations, ethnonational exclusion and religious discourse to approach the problem of reproduction. However, this post-social-democratic approach generally is unwilling to provide material security through large-scale social expenditures and universal welfare institutions, preferring instead to address the ‘hearts and minds’ of the populace. Consequently, the fundamental cause of sub-replacement fertility—the gradual proliferation of ontological insecurity—remains unaddressed. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Nordic Journal of Social Research;Volume 11, Issue 1 | |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. | en |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | |
dc.subject | Biopolitics | en |
dc.subject | Foucault, Michel | en |
dc.subject | Ethno-nationalism | en |
dc.subject | Social democracies | en |
dc.subject | Neoliberalism | en |
dc.subject | Fertility | en |
dc.title | Reproduction and the welfare state: Notes on Norwegian biopolitics | en |
dc.type | Journal article | en |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en |
dc.date.updated | 2020-02-13T12:08:57Z | |
dc.description.version | publishedVersion | en |
dc.identifier.doi | https://dx.doi.org/10.7577/njsr.3244 | |
dc.identifier.cristin | 1790186 | |
dc.source.journal | Nordic Journal of Social Research | |