The concept freedom is frequently used in political discussions without awareness of the multiple meanings it potentially contains. In order to act on today’s climate challenge, freedom has come to play an essential role as something we either have to sacrifice or insist on protecting. However, freedom is an abstract concept and may involve different perceptions among people - also in politics. Using qualitative interviews, this study finds multiple notionsof freedom among Danish party members across the political parties. The party members are identified to subscribe to two main perceptions: individual freedom and collective freedom. The analysis shows that freedom is not purely divisible by Isiah Berlin’s categories where thestate either interferes or refrains from interference, but rather that state interference can align with each of the two main perceptions. Whilst some of the party members subscribe solely to individual freedom, the majority are found to switch depending on if the political issue involves economic freedom or not. By comparing the party members’ varying positions on the political issues; climate, freedom of religion, and tax and social benefits, with the standpoint of their parties, it points towards a correlation between the notion of freedom and the political position.The findings indicate that we do not need a new perception of freedom to achieve the green transition. Instead, we must utilise the existence of different perceptions of freedom and devise a solution where individual freedom can align with the green transition.

En droit français, le régime des attroupements et rassemblements est au carrefour des droits administratif et pénal. Il dépasse le droit de manifester reconnu et protégé, tout en étant une nouvelle manière pour les citoyens de manifester leurs opinions, souvent véhiculées par Internet. Ces prises de position ont souvent pour point commun leur caractère spontané et immédiat, ainsi que leurs formes très éclectiques. Polysémique et évolutif dans son contenu, l’ordre public limite les atteintes à la liberté de manifester dont il est le corollaire. Dès lors, un équilibre entre les deux est exigé, illustré par la tolérance de l'autorité administrative d'un certain degré de désordre. C'est aujourd'hui la seule manière de concilier l'intérêt du pouvoir et des attroupements mobilisés dans la rue. Le maintien de l’ordre est l’une des missions principales des forces de police. Les dispositifs de prévention et les opérations de rétablissement de l’ordre troublé doivent obéir à la nécessité et à la proportionnalité reconnues à l’échelle européenne et nationale, assurant ainsi la légitimité des interventions policières. L’objectif poursuivi de cette recherche est de tenter de définir un régime juridique des attroupements unique, fondé sur l’ordre public dans un système cohérent et pertinent, indicateur du degré démocratique des systèmes contemporains. Ce fil directeur prend appui sur les textes, sur la jurisprudence, ou sur la doctrine mais aussi sur la pratique du maintien de l’ordre. / In French law, the rules governing gatherings and assemblies sit at the crossroads of administrative and criminal law. They go beyond the right to protest, which is recognised and protected, whilst also being a new way for citizens to demonstrate their opinions, often conveyed via the internet. Such positions often share a spontaneous and immediate nature, as well as taking highly eclectic forms. Polysemous and constantly evolving in terms of its content, public order limits the freedom of demonstration of which it is a corollary. Consequently, a balance between the two is required, illustrated by tolerance on the part of the administrative authorities of a certain degree of disorder. It is currently the only way to reconcile the interests of public authority and gatherings mobilised in the streets. One of the main tasks of police forces is to maintain order. Preventive mechanisms and operations intended to re-establish public order must be guided by necessity and proportionality, which are recognised at European and national levels, thus ensuring the legitimacy of police intervention. The aim pursued by this research is to attempt to define a single set of rules governing gatherings, based on public order within a consistent and relevant system, which is an indicator of the level of democracy in modern systems. That guiding principle is based on legislation, case law and jurisprudence, as well as the practicalities of maintaining public order.