Militant demokrati Mellemkrigstidens svar på politisk vold

This article examines the management of political violence in the Danish interwar period, focusing on the ban of uniforms 1933 and ban of private political militias 1934. The aim is to clarify whether the politicians defended democracy by means of legislation. Historians have suggested that the prohibitions were adopted in response to fascism and the unstable political situation in Southern Jutland, bordering Germany. These suggestions are plausible but empirical details are needed in order to give a nuanced understanding of the interaction between democracy and antidemocratic movements. For example, it is unclear with which arguments the bills were supported or rejected. Furthermore, it could be interesting to address the driving force behind the laws. By combining an analysis of political rhetoric and policy making the article argues, that the politicians initiated the legislation to fight antidemocratic forces and to avoid militarization of the political life. However, the laws should be seen as preventive measures as they were intended to forestall the use of illegitimate force. While the repressive laws demonstrated that the executives and parliamentary majority were willing to use state power to protect the constitution, the laws also restricted and curtailed some of the democratic rights. On the basis of this paradox, the article discusses, whether Danish politics in the 1930s can be characterized by the concept militant democracy.