{"id":4257,"date":"2026-06-25T10:53:05","date_gmt":"2026-06-25T08:53:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/?post_type=dialogue&p=4257"},"modified":"2026-06-25T10:53:07","modified_gmt":"2026-06-25T08:53:07","slug":"democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character","status":"publish","type":"dialogue","link":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/","title":{"rendered":"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

About Marie-Luisa Frick<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Marie-Luisa Frick is Professor of Practical Philosophy in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Innsbruck. Her research focuses on legal philosophy, political philosophy and ethics, with an emphasis on human rights and democracy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a lecture, you once said that democracy is actually a crazy idea. What did you mean by that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is not my own point of view, it is an opinion most people have had for centuries and in fact, many still have. This means that, for a long time, people were not trusted to really govern themselves, to find good solutions for themselves, to negotiate these among each other, and then to also make the necessary decisions with the required impact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the modern era, these doubts about people\u2019s ability to govern themselves go back to the Enlightenment, the period when our constitutional democracies emerged. This means that even pioneers of republicanism never fully embraced a form of democracy where people are constantly allowed to participate in and decide everything themselves. Instead, institutions, especially representative institutions, are meant to relieve people of this burden and to keep them, in check<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On a global scale, such doubts still exist today. They are also expressed through ideological propaganda in systems such as China\u2019s or in theocratic states, for instance, where people look down on this supposed misguided idea that humans can govern themselves as sovereign people. So yes, a lot of people consider democracy an affront, even a ludicrous idea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even in representative democracies there is scepticism about whether the people can be trusted to make the right decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such scepticism today is also found in academic circles and, in recent years, more and more intellectuals came to believe that people are too easily manipulated and therefore require greater constraints on their political impulses and interests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This has led to proposals such as an epistocratic model where power is distributed based on knowledge and competence and voting where rights are restricted. Advocates of this system consider it superior to representative democracy, which, in any case, is itself already a diluted form of democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where are these tendencies found?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are political theorists like Jason Brennan[1]<\/sup><\/a> who write that democracy is a rather bad solution as it tends to pit people against each other and leads to poor results. They advocate leaving matters of governance to experts and specialists and letting \u201cordinary\u201d people go about their lives in peace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Can experts really make all decisions for us?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is also, of course, the important counterargument that many political questions cannot be resolved solely with technical or scholarly expertise. These decisions often concern values, norms, weighing of interests \u2013 significant decisions that experts cannot make on our behalf and which, in my view, we therefore should not delegate entirely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Democracy, even direct democracy, may be something we take for granted. Does this maybe have something to do with society\u2019s self-awareness, possibly also with a kind of historical experience?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Definitely. It is hard to deny, for instance, that Switzerland generally has a mature model of democracy. In referendums, citizens do not always get tempted by the most convenient solution for them, and seem to make responsible decisions. But then we often hear: \u201cYes, but it\u2019s Switzerland\u201d. It is seen as an exception with conditions that do not apply elsewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What makes Switzerland an exception?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We can ask what enabled Switzerland to develop in this way, and what, in the medium to long term, could maybe move us in this direction so that we can expand our democracy instead of scaling it back out of fear of the people. Ultimately, we can see that it can work well or even better, including in terms of citizens\u2019 satisfaction with the political system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the coming years, many representative democracies will face the pressing question of how to still appear legitimate in the eyes of the majority of the population and how to present their arrangements as attractive to young people in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When talking about Switzerland, for example, it is often said that the system only works because the country is relatively small. Is that a legitimate argument?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Personally, I don\u2019t think size is the decisive factor. The important condition is that there are well-established procedures and social learning experiences. This is also why Austria, despite being of a similar size, for example, could not simply adopt the Swiss model right away. We would need to start with small steps there so people could become accustomed to having greater freedom of participation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Usually, we talk about the right or obligation of participation. Should we, in fact, maybe place greater emphasis on the freedom to do this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Self-legislation is, by nature, freedom: the members of a political community decide by majority rather than a chosen group or guardians of a sacrosanct divine or \u201cnatural\u201d order. The fact that these decisions can also restrict the freedom of minorities, however, brings the focus to democracy\u2019s second pillar: equality. Democratic minorities must also have the same rights if maximum democratic freedom is to be ensured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Debate is essential for a democracy. The way this is done is likely to be of crucial importance, however. In your book \u201cZivilisiert streiten[2]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u201d (Civility in Public Disputes), you also refer to the pair of concepts \u201copposition\u201d and \u201cenmity\u201d. How do these help us better understand democratic debate?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I adopted this pair of concepts from Chantal Mouffe. She, in turn, took them from Carl Schmitt and others. They encapsulate an idea that represents balance: on the one hand, disputes, conflict, cannot and should not be avoided entirely. On the other hand, we need ways of dealing with and shaping conflict that do not completely tear the political community apart.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today there is a lot of talk about diversity. Diversity is plurality plus freedom. In diverse societies there are many different lifestyles and views. Such societies cannot avoid conflict. People may be forceful in their arguments and even polarise with their views. Essentially, though, we also have to realise \u2013 and for democrats this is an ethical responsibility \u2013 that in principle we should not see each other as enemies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This means not expelling others from the shared space of democratic reasoning and refraining from degrading them. I am afraid, however, that not wanting to destroy others, either symbolically or physically, is no longer self-evident today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rhetoric of belittling opponents, dehumanising them, as it were, and expelling them, as you say, from the shared space has intensified. Why is this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps the reason is that, in recent years, a series of major almost existential issues have been debated. Many people had or have the feeling that everything is at stake \u2013 for better or for worse and, not least, for their way of life. Once such fundamentals are being called into question, or people believe they are being attacked by others, whether through migration, the consequences of the pandemic or the economic crisis, politics is no longer a matter of easy-to-negotiate, everyday policy issues. For many people, what they see as being up for negotiation is, ultimately, non-negotiable. This reduces people\u2019s ability to compromise and their willingness to continue dialogue with those they disagree with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is there a kind of tipping point at which opposition becomes enmity?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most theorists assume that democracy erodes gradually. It is a slow, creeping process in which, eventually, people confront each another as enemies. Essentially, I would also see it this way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, we might go beyond a tipping point when political groups no longer rule out military or paramilitary action and begin preparing for the destruction of their enemy. We have seen this many times throughout history, including in the early years of the First Austrian Republic and the Weimar Republic. We are far from this today, at least in Europe. At the same time, it is no longer entirely unimaginable that extremist movements are radicalising beneath the surface in this manner and are actually just waiting for their moment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, if we notice the symptoms, it means we have already gone beyond the tipping point. But by then it is actually too late.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is a very difficult task to respond in a timely manner, including through the use of the state\u2019s coercive power and to ensure its legitimate monopoly on force, and also to not act too quickly to exclude certain dissident or oppositional movements from the democratic process. We can see this in the debate about banning the AFD in Germany: There are good reasons for doing this, and also strong arguments against it. This means that this debate should be approached with great care and must not be motivated by political opportunism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is it also, to some extent, connected with the shift away from rational arguments towards more moral ones?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Democratic politics is and always has been intrinsically connected with morality. It is not only about procedures and institutions, or the legal framework as such, but about ideas on how to live together successfully as free and equal human beings. Of course, in an open society, ideas about what is right and wrongs are heterogeneous. Fortunately, we do not all have the same idea of how it should be ensured that we live together successfully. That makes it all the more important to keep up constructive dialogue, especially since in a democracy we as individuals cannot decide on such questions by ourselves alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The art lies in engaging in discussions about values in a way that avoids escalation. How can this be encouraged?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is indeed a great art. People living in an unfree society in which an elite, a party or a leader makes decisions for them can maybe come together to express their dissatisfaction at being governed badly. They cannot do much apart from dealing with their everyday lives, however. Democracies have much higher demands. As citizens we should keep ourselves up-to-date. We should address situations that seem to cause problems for us. We should speak with others about these issues and try to change or reinforce opinions depending on whether they seem right or wrong to us. Democracies require engaged citizens. At least a large part of the citizens in a democracy should fall into this category, otherwise democracy becomes stagnant. People require a variety of competences so that they can be engaged intellectually or also through their actions. One essential competence I would argue, is having a certain empathy towards others and their values and also patience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Values are not something that is simply adopted or imitated. They are shaped by our life stories, learned socially, and have a greater history, often a very long one going back across generations. Which means people cannot simply be remoulded overnight, even though this often seems to be expected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Empathy is an important concept. Elon Musk says empathy is overrated. Is that symptomatic of an anti-democratic attitude?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, within the clique of such \u201csuper-men\u201d and their techno-aristocratic worldview, empathy is a sign of weakness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, political radicalisation deliberately rejects reason. How can debate continue, then, if reason is excluded?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reason is not the only standard even if our democracies are, of course, based on rational principles. They also leave room for certain irrationality and emotion. Having a secret ballot, for example, means people can vote without publicly justifying their decisions. Democracy needs this. I believe it is important to understand which forms of irrationality ultimately become dangerous, however. So, for instance, when people develop a tunnel vision of enmity and think they know precisely who has always been solely responsible for all problems, this leads to self-enforcing mental regressions that can, in fact, cause serious damage to political comities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Assigning blame is a key component in the repertoire of agitators. And it is usually directed at minorities. Protection of minorities, however, is also a pillar of democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Minorities, democratic minorities, are essentially just as important as majorities and have equal rights. This is a basic tenant of democracies, and one that must also be practised. And again, protection of minorities also includes certain forms of irrationality. This is because not everything that seems unreasonable to us is actually a problem for democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to democratic minorities, there are also ethnic, religious and cultural minorities. These are often the target of sweeping attributions of blame. In the form of political resentment, however, such sweeping attributions of blame can, essentially, target any group, depending on who is the focus of the anger coming from a sense of being a victim. In the logic of resentment, people see themselves as the ultimate victim, and others are held responsible to the greatest possible extent for all the bad things happening that they cannot change. Those people then become objects of a desire to revenge and have to be deprived of their power, excluded, destroyed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These are mechanisms that are both ancient and also continue to reappear in new forms. We have to understand them. It is important here, though, that these scapegoat dynamics must not be confused with specific, hard-headed criticism of institutions, individuals or certain groups, which always exists and should be all the more legitimate in a democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Minority protection has gained in strength in recent years. Politicians such as Orban in Hungary have deliberately incited public opinion against minorities, however. Are we witnessing a backlash to this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Various groups demand certain rights and consideration because they are vulnerable due to their nature or specific characteristics. These are legitimate concerns. One question that I think is sometimes overlooked is about the methods that can be used to make these concerns understandable and acceptable for broader segments of society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a democratic society, it is crucial of making ourselves acceptable to others and their views, including by being willingness to compromise. I am aware that for many, such a statement is of course provocative because they say there can be no compromises in certain areas, for example regarding their identity. Again, I would want to emphasise that a lot of things that one person takes for granted may appear nonsensical to others. If someone has an idea of family that differs from the traditional image and wants to establish new sets of rights accordingly, they cannot successfully do so without a certain amount of empathy towards those who, perhaps, have not yet reached this sort of progressiveness. If these more reluctant people are vilified politically and morally, they will only become even firmer in their opposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So are you saying some groups may need to moderate their demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How we present ourselves to others has an impact on how others perceive our concerns. We therefore have at least some control over the extent to which we are delegitimised or caricatured as enemies. In a diverse society we should, I think, expect resistance and pursue our goals by beginning with the few areas where consensus maybe still exists, such as condemnation of brute force and also of cruelty towards the weak.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although we live in diverse societies, there are tendencies towards ghettoisation or spatial homogenisation, which in turn lead to conflicts. If politics allows this, has it failed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don\u2019t think politics has failed. Every open society is also shaped by parallel societies, subgroups and subcultures. This is not inherently problematic. It becomes a problem when different groups view each other as enemies and stop communicating. However, we cannot discuss this topic without also addressing social media, which are particularly prone to intensifying the formation of such in- and out-groups. Certain technological frameworks amplify tendencies that are already inherent in human nature, like tribalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before we discuss the role of media, let\u2019s turn to another question about the facts. Recriminations can often be refuted with facts. These are ignored, however. Why do they not prevail?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because facts do not speak for themselves and they only become reliable in a respective context. It depends who vouches for them, that is who is the epistemic authority providing these facts. Since the pandemic \u2013 and maybe even before \u2013 some parts of society have developed a deep distrust of experts. There may be many reasons for this, but for a technologically advanced society like ours, this is devastating in the long term. Facts can support finding solutions for problems only when people trust the experts who present them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This trust also decreased during the pandemic because experts kept changing their statements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Understanding that science produces preliminary knowledge that can be revised and also criticised is an important learning from these times. This should also help protect against treating statements made by \u201cscience\u201d as absolute truth and wanting to translate them directly into political action. It is important that both sides in this situation understand that science does not provide a blueprint for political action, it can only help prepare and provide information for further political debate. This is where its incomparable value can be found.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many people seem to have lost trust once and for all. What can we do about this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, we should try to make sure these people do not attract followers or sympathizers on a larger scale, and therefore slow down the contagion, so to speak. Young people in particular need to be socialised so they develop a critical understanding of science and do not believe everything that allegedly features in a study somewhere, but also learn how systems of scientific critique work and why scientific findings can generally be trusted precisely because science requires critical scrutiny from within.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, citizens should also be free to scrutinize cases where this internal criticism maybe no longer takes place, or no longer takes place to the required extent, without being denounced as mere opponents of science. So open debate is also needed in that regard about what works well and what perhaps does not work well enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is this an obligation of science?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don\u2019t believe it is only an obligation of science. In Europe, there has been a lot of progress in terms of continuing education opportunities, public outreach and insights into the modes of operation of sciences, thanks in part to the internet. Work in the \u201civory tower\u201d basically no longer exists. But of course, people also have to take an interest in how different disciplines obtain their results and what is being researched and where.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earlier we discussed crises. They seem to be getting out of control. When the pie gets smaller, people become more selfish. Is democracy only a fair-weather phenomenon?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I would hope not. But there is empirical data that hints at exactly this problem: We can afford moral generosity most easily when it does not threaten us with consequences that are detrimental to us existentially. At the level of society, we must address the psychosocial tendencies that push people into these strong in-group and out-group dynamics by also focusing on their material root causes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

History shows that, under some circumstances, democracies also succumb to such tendencies. Here we can consider Switzerland during the Second World War, when it closed its borders to Jewish refugees. Do democracies have to limit the protection of minorities in extreme situations in order to survive?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is a very difficult question. In representative democracies in particular, where many people already suspect that decisions being made \u201cat the top\u201d are not being made in their interest, and that instead a political elite is calling the shots, we cannot ignore certain \u201cus first\u201d attitudes in the long run. Democracy is a form of government that cannot be maintained in opposition to the people, it requires their conviction-based endorsement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We may regret this or, conversely, take a certain amount of pride in living in a political system that depends on people supporting it freely. I think a lot of people often do not realise how lucky they are to live in a free democratic society. And such a sense of gratitude would also maybe help us to become more altruistic when it really matters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You mentioned the role of media, especially social media. Radicalisation is not a new phenomenon though. Does media criticism not go quite far enough?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Questions of blame are always complex. I would also prefer to speak of responsibility. Responsibility lies first and foremost with us as we should heed what moral psychology says about human beings from an evolutionary perspective. These are not very flattering insights. That is to say, under certain conditions, we can easily fall into tribalistic group-think and exclude others. Often, we already think and act with certain intentions that, as I said, are not always rational or transparent to ourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Responsibility, however, also lies with the engineers of these media platforms who, under the direction of their owners, aim to generate profit. At some point, also limits should be put into place regarding attempts to keep users on a platform for as long as possible, not least in terms of youth protection dissemination of extremist content, too, needs some sort of regulation. Responsibility, however, also extends to media education, which can make a significant contribution here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You mentioned the owners of platforms. Here we are thinking about Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and also people like Peter Thiel. They are not known for their democratic views. Are we witnessing a conflict between high-tech firms and high finance on the one hand, and democratic institutions on the other?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fortunately, the men you mentioned do not own all social platforms or the entire media infrastructure. But the situation is serious enough. It is an intricate problem how we, as a democracy, deal with the fact that certain crucial infrastructure of our modern societies is provided by private actors rather than public authorities. Ultimately, then, it comes down to chance whether these private individuals are inclined one way or the other, so whether they are democratically minded or more or less anti-democratic. A fundamental problem is that large fortunes, when they exert political influence either directly or indirectly, can undermine the basic democratic principle that each person\u2019s vote is of equal value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where do you think our democracies will stand in five years?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is not something I could know, but I see Switzerland as being on a relatively stable path. It will face the question of how closely it wants to align itself with the European Union or rather choose to go its own way. For Austria, the major question is how the country can consolidate its economy again. For Germany, a priority is how to deal with the AFD. I think this is really a vital question with major and, perhaps, also dramatic consequences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You have already emphasised the responsibility of education. But what do people actually have to learn in order to participate in a democracy?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are a whole series of curricula proposed under the term democratic education. More trivially, it is also a matter of how we speak with others day by day, how carefully we listen to each other, and how we understand ourselves as being part of a larger community where every individual counts, but no one can set the tone alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, we could say: it is a matter of learning opposition and avoiding enmity. How can we learn opposition and avoid enmity?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is, ultimately, is a question about character formation. Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character. Not everyone can be perfect, they do not need to be either. But if there are too few people visible \u2013 including as role models \u2013 who represent anything close to a democratic character, that is where it gets though.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Character formation is an important subject in adult education. Would it maybe be useful if those responsible for education also became more aware \u2013 to put it somewhat boastfully \u2013 of the role they play in promoting democracy?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Any form of continuing education \u2013 whether with groups or individuals \u2013 provides added value when it empowers people and strengthens their critical capacities. Continuing education can enable people to try something new, and it has added democratic value when, during the course, they can express themselves and open up without being contradicted immediately or even shut down disrespectfully. Development is not possible until people experience being treated with appreciation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/sup><\/a> In his book \u201cAgainst Democracy\u201d, the American political scientist Jason Brennan speaks in favour of various selective models of voting rights and distribution of power. Jason Brennan. Against Democracy. Princeton University Press. 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/sup><\/a> Marie-Luisa Frick. Zivilisiert streiten. Zur Ethik der politischen Gegnerschaft. Reclam. 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

To assess the limits of what is and is not possible in a democracy, the philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for both civil discourse and robust debates. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":4254,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"dialogue-category":[169,159],"dialogue-tag":[167],"class_list":["post-4257","dialogue","type-dialogue","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","dialogue-category-polarisation","dialogue-category-political-education","dialogue-tag-marie-luisa-frick"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nDemocracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character - TRANSIT<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"European democracies are under pressure. The philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for civil discourse and robust debates.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"fr_FR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character - TRANSIT\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"European democracies are under pressure. The philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for civil discourse and robust debates.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"TRANSIT\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-06-25T08:53:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2026\/06\/image0.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"683\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Ronald Schenkel\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039\"},\"headline\":\"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-25T08:53:05+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-25T08:53:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4091,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/image0.png\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/\",\"name\":\"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character - TRANSIT\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/image0.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-25T08:53:05+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-25T08:53:07+00:00\",\"description\":\"European democracies are under pressure. The philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for civil discourse and robust debates.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/image0.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/image0.png\",\"width\":1024,\"height\":683},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Page d\u2019accueil\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dialogues\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/\",\"name\":\"TRANSIT\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Thinktank TRANSIT\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Think Tank TRANSIT\",\"alternateName\":\"TRANSIT\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/transit.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/transit.svg\",\"width\":284,\"height\":48,\"caption\":\"Think Tank TRANSIT\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039\",\"name\":\"Ronald Schenkel\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ronald Schenkel\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/xeit\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/author\\\/ronaldschenkel\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character - TRANSIT","description":"European democracies are under pressure. The philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for civil discourse and robust debates.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/","og_locale":"fr_FR","og_type":"article","og_title":"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character - TRANSIT","og_description":"European democracies are under pressure. The philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for civil discourse and robust debates.","og_url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/","og_site_name":"TRANSIT","article_modified_time":"2026-06-25T08:53:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":683,"url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2026\/06\/image0.png","type":"image\/png"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/"},"author":{"name":"Ronald Schenkel","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039"},"headline":"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character","datePublished":"2026-06-25T08:53:05+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-25T08:53:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/"},"wordCount":4091,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2026\/06\/image0.png","inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/","name":"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character - TRANSIT","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2026\/06\/image0.png","datePublished":"2026-06-25T08:53:05+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-25T08:53:07+00:00","description":"European democracies are under pressure. The philosopher Marie-Luisa Frick advocates for civil discourse and robust debates.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"fr-FR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2026\/06\/image0.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2026\/06\/image0.png","width":1024,"height":683},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/democracy-requires-a-sufficient-number-of-people-with-a-democratic-character\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Page d\u2019accueil","item":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dialogues","item":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Democracy requires a sufficient number of people with a democratic character"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#website","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/","name":"TRANSIT","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Thinktank TRANSIT","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#organization","name":"Think Tank TRANSIT","alternateName":"TRANSIT","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/transit.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/transit.svg","width":284,"height":48,"caption":"Think Tank TRANSIT"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039","name":"Ronald Schenkel","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ronald Schenkel"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/xeit"],"url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/author\/ronaldschenkel\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue\/4257","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/dialogue"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/26"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue\/4257\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4259,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue\/4257\/revisions\/4259"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4254"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4257"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"dialogue-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue-category?post=4257"},{"taxonomy":"dialogue-tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue-tag?post=4257"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}