Biopolitics and zoēpolitics in a post-political era: hegemonic struggle in the Swedish debate on foreign terrorist fighters

With an increasing number of Swedish citizens joining military extremist organizations in the Middle East, this study aims to identify and discuss the current discourses on how to handle foreign terrorist fighters through an analysis of the Swedish debate during 2014-2015. While one faction presents strategies and policy suggestions aiming to restitute what are described as mentally ill and socioeconomically excluded individuals, others in turn propose repressive measures through harsher punishment and revocation of citizenship of individuals identified as a threat to Western values. Using the methodological approach from discourse theory, this work aims to explore the ways in which the discourses are constructed. Furthermore, the study applies the Foucauldian toolbox of governmentality, and the ideas of biopolitics and zoēpolitics respectively to explore the inherent rationalities within each discourse, opening up for a discussion on what possible consequences a hegemonic struggle between the discourses implies. The work concludes that in an era of post-politics where morals can be argued to have triumphed over politics, repressive measures referring to the securitization and protection of Western values present themselves as an objective and reasonable lines of action in contrast to restitutive strategies where foreign terrorist fighters are constructed as victims in need of help