MILITANT DEMOCRACY. RIGHT TO REBELLION. DEFENCE OF DEMOCRACY

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of this article is to examine the concept of militant democracy, its inherent contradictions, and the limits of legitimate democratic defense, as well as to explore the right to rebellion as a potential element of the democratic process. The author questions the conventional opposition between democracy and violence, emphasizing that democracy, as a political system, not only requires protection but at times demands means that may contradict its own principles. Methods. The study employs an interdisciplinary approach, combining political philosophy, legal theory, and the analysis of specific historical examples. The primary focus is not on legal analysis but on a philosophical reflection on the relationship between democracy, violence, and the right to resistance. Results. The article demonstrates that militant democracy is not only a model for protecting against anti-democratic threats but also a potentially dangerous mechanism for curtailing rights and freedoms. It is emphasized that the appeal to “self-defense of democracy” is often used as a political justification for repressive practices. The author examines various approaches to understanding the defense of democracy and analyzes historical examples (Germany) that illustrate the complexity of defining acceptable limits within a democratic regime. Conclusions. Democracy, as a living political form, cannot be reduced to a set of procedures. Its preservation often requires a choice between liberty and security, and at times – a reevaluation of the very notion of legitimacy. In this context, the right to rebellion is viewed not as a threat to democracy but as a form of its radical defense in exceptional circumstances.