Militant democrats admit that primacy should be given to procedures, but these should be designed in a way that secures the survival of the democratic procedure against popular threats. It concerns the protection of the democratic procedure and is thus based on an idea that the procedure is worth protecting but is in principle agnostic about the value of the procedure. This paper distinguishes between three different ideas about the value of the democratic procedure: pure proceduralism, epistemic proceduralism, and fair proceduralism and assess the compatibility between militant democracy and each of these three.
