This master thesis arose form an observation of the impact of the Danish government’s countering of radicalization. The debate about the National Action plans for countering radicalization and the controversy that flowed them inspired me to write this master thesis. This master thesis analyzes the communicative paradoxes within the Danish government’s communication regarding radicalization. Furthermore, the analysis shows how the government’s observations of radicalization could work as counterproductive and if it was considered to create suspect communities and dehumanizing the enemy. My empirical data is the National Action Plans for Countering Radicalization and Extremism from 2009, 2014 and 2016, because they set the narrative for how the Danish government observes radicalization. The theoretical approach for this master thesis is mostly from the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann’s semantic analysis and Carl Schmitt’s critic on liberalism and humanity. I have examined what significant meaning constructions and paradoxes can be located in the National Action plans and how the government via. its communication dehumanizes certain people and communities in Denmark. My conclusion is that the Danish model for preventing radicalization is politically controlled and that the Danish government’s observation of the prevention of radicalization is being linked to parallel societies, religion and lack of integration despite a lack of evidence thereof. I also found that the governments approach to countering radicalization creates the distinction between “us” versus “them” in the Danish society, which creates more marginalization, assimilation and dehumanization of different communities and individuals in the Danish society.
|Uddannelser||Cand.soc.pkl Politisk Kommunikation og Ledelse, (Kandidatuddannelse) Afsluttende afhandling|
|Vejledere||Anders la Cour|