The role of symbolic politics in exceptional crime policy debate: a study of the 2014 Swedish general election

Abstract

Symbolic politics are often considered to be closely linked to an alarmist rhetoric, as well as to punitive crime policy initiatives. This article explores the symbolic dimension of the Swedish crime policy debate. Since Sweden is frequently depicted as an antithesis to punitive Anglophone societies, exploring symbolic politics in this setting might expand our understanding of what symbolic statements may consist of. The article analyses the electoral campaign preceding the Swedish general election of 2014, with the aim of identifying which symbolic statements occupy a central position in the debate through the use of a qualitative content analysis. This analysis reveals an ambiguous political rhetoric, comprising morally and emotionally charged condemnatory statements about getting tough on crime, as well as reformist and restrained references to expert knowledge and long-term solutions. On the one hand, these reformist statements strengthen the image of Swedish crime policy as being based on ideals such as rationality and humanity. On the other, they also serve to legitimize and obscure penal expansion.

“I’ll Look Into it!” Lubricants in Conversational Coproduction

“…Political arenas are pervaded not only by beliefs, values, and ideology (cf. Boswell 2009;Tieberghien and Decorte 2013;Stevens 2007;Monaghan 2010;Ritter 2009;Eriksson and Edman 2017;Fraser 2016;Lancaster 2014Lancaster , 2016, but also by other social dimensions, such as emotions (Roumeliotis 2016;Hermansson 2018). The current article adds to this tradition the importance of conversational routines.…”

Fostering Agents of Change: Governing, Crime Prevention and Teaching for Security

“…In this debate, an alarmist rhetoric has gained momentum. Calls for "being tough on criminality" has become more and more normalised, as well as proposals for more repressive measures to be taken (Hermansson, 2017;Wahlgren & Andersson, 2018), not least targeting the suburban youth (Sernhede et al, 2016). Similar policy developments have also been noted in other countries (Dikec, 2017;Eick, 2011;Graham, 2011).…”