Alf Ross (1899-1979).

Democracy has always been linked to discussion. Freedom of expression is central, because all parties must be able to present their interests and arguments publicly. The democratic discussion is an intimate ritual, whether it takes place in the Folketing (Danish Parliament) or the village hall. But what is its purpose? Is it to convince the other participants in the discussion, so that everyone ends up in agreement? Or is the aim to bring aspects of an issue into the light, whereupon the parties can maintain their disagreement or let an election determine which viewpoint weighs the heaviest and can gather a majority?

A good discussion allows the parties involved to convince each other as well as change opinion. A democratic discussion should not just present an interest, but also argue for it and place it in relation to what serves the common good. A democratic process should also bend interests towards each other, either towards agreement on a matter or towards reaching a fair compromise. But in the end, what determines the outcome is neither the good argument nor the appeal to the Truth with a capital ‘T’, but the mathematical majority, which in the Folketing requires 90 seats. The living conversation collides with the ritual conversation, which is only pursued for appearances’ sake or to convince invisible voters.

For Hal Koch, democracy is first and foremost a way of life, at the heart of which is conversation. What is crucial is that the parties are willing to listen, understand, learn and contextualise. Democracy is not a system or a theory, but a way of life and a mentality that has slowly developed. It is the degeneration of democracy if a majority simply goes through the motions of discussion before imposing its will. For this reason, Hal Koch uses words like “fruitful meetings” and “sincere debate”.

For Alf Ross, democracy is primarily a form of government, at the heart of which is freedom. What freedom leads to is undetermined. Democracy does not determine what people are to think, and it is not about finding the Truth. It is a formal procedure, in which all interests can be voiced and given political force in relation to a majority principle. However, a majority only has the right to make decisions for a limited period, so that democracy is also a formal procedure for dismissing those in power in a civilised way. Therefore, fundamental freedoms and legal rights are crucial for democracy.

Even though Hal Koch and Alf Ross each highlight their own view of democracy, they are not fundamentally in disagreement. Hal Koch also believes that democracy requires a formal apparatus, whilst Alf Ross also believes that democracy rests on social preconditions such as an informed population and freedom from hardship and misery.

Hal Koch: “In general, there are only two ways to find this solution [to the conflict between different interests]: One can use violence, which means that the will of the stronger prevails; as happens in the jungle. Often it is difficult, however, to discern the difference between human and jungle animal behaviour. One can use reason, which means that through a conversation between the disputing parties effort is made to throw light on all aspects of the matter in question, and that the conversing parties truly endeavour – which should not be overlooked – through conversation to reach a more correct and more reasonable understanding of the conflict’s problem.

This is democracy. It is conversation (dialogue) coupled with mutual understanding and respect; that is the essence of democracy. In the absence of this, one will invariably revert back to a power struggle. Understanding democracy in this way is somewhat far more extensive than a particular societal form of government.”

FROMWHAT IS DEMOCRACY?, 1945.

Alf Ross: “To sum up, the ideology of representative democracy may perhaps be expressed like this: Man is not essentially a rational being. The great masses are predominantly sluggish and conservative, full of prejudice and traditions, suspicious of everything new. The people require leadership. The idea of individual selfdetermination and responsibility is linked up with the idea of trust in leadership. Along with the urge for independence, there lies in man the urge to put his faith in leadership of those who are wiser and more competent than himself. Whilst direct democracy builds only upon the urge for personal independence, these two tendencies are harmoniously united in representative democracy: the leadership remains under popular control and depends on the leaders’ ability to hold the people’s confidence on a basis free of criticism and expression of opinion.”

FROMWHY DEMOCRACY?, 1946.

Hal Koch (1904-1963).

This page is part of the electronic publication "The Danish Democracy Canon"
© The Ministry of Education 2008