z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Reproduction and the Welfare State: Notes on Norwegian Biopolitics
Author(s) -
Victor Lund Shammas,
Tony Sandset
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
nordic journal of social research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1892-2783
DOI - 10.7577/njsr.3244
Subject(s) - biopower , neoliberalism (international relations) , welfare state , political economy , sociology , ideology , politics , coalition government , reproduction , political science , law , ecology , biology
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.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here