Civil society and its outside: Analysing the boundary between civil and uncivil society in the Danish anti-radicalization discourse

The literature on the boundary between civil and uncivil society has reached an impasse between approaches that oppose these societies to each other and those that dismiss the boundary altogether. This article suggests an analytical shift to a governmental approach that asks how the relation between civil and uncivil society figures in social practices. The approach is applied to the case of the Danish anti-radicalization discourse which revolves around subjects that cross the boundary. Through a discourse analysis of governmental papers, the author argues that the boundary appears twice. First, as a categorical difference that is simultaneously erected and annulled. This is not a paradox that must be superseded but one which structures a rationality of the governed in Civil Society that a governmental rationality pegs itself to inside an indefinite time. Second, this rationality is only possible through the rejection of violence. This creates a void which serves as an object of the discourse while existing outside the indefinite time of governmentality.