DREIESKIVA​|Roald Kvam

There are parliamentary elections in my home country this year (2025). It made me pause… to reflect: In recent years, we have heard a growing call for “more value-based politics.” The phrase resonates—who wouldn’t want political decisions rooted in solid values rather than short-term tactics? But behind the rhetoric lies an important question: are some leaders or parties truly more value-based than others? Or are they simply working from different values?

Democracy, at its core, is not a competition between value-driven politics and value-free politics. It is a contest between competing sets of values—and the societal visions they produce.

Democracy is built on value choices

Every policy decision reflects an underlying value choice. When a government decides to prioritize healthcare funding, it reflects values like solidarity, care, and social equity. When another emphasizes economic growth through deregulation, it is equally value-driven, rooted in freedom, efficiency, and opportunity.

Thus, when we debate whether society needs more value-based politics, the deeper issue is not quantity of values but which values should guide us. Do we emphasize collective responsibility or individual freedom? Tradition or progress? Equality of outcome or equality of opportunity?

Values in practice: Schools, businesses, nations

Consider schools. One political vision might highlight discipline, excellence, and performance as core values, while another emphasizes inclusion, creativity, and emotional well-being. Both visions are “value-based,” but they shape very different institutions.

The same applies to businesses. Some argue that companies should maximize shareholder returns, prioritizing efficiency, innovation, and competition. Others believe that businesses must also embrace sustainability, social responsibility, and community well-being. Again, it is not about being “value-based” or not—it is about which values you elevate above others.

On the scale of nations, this becomes even clearer. Immigration, welfare, climate policy, foreign relations—these are never neutral questions. They are choices between competing values.

The danger of claiming monopoly on values

When political movements frame themselves as “the value-based alternative,” they risk suggesting that others lack values—or worse, that their values are illegitimate. This undermines the democratic principle that society is built on plurality, negotiation, and compromise.

The true challenge of a healthy democracy is not to discover which side has values and which side doesn’t. It is to openly debate which values should carry the greatest weight in shaping our common future.

Building a value-conscious democracy

What does this mean in practice?

1. Transparency: Political actors should name their values clearly. Citizens deserve to know whether a policy is rooted in solidarity, freedom, responsibility, sustainability, or something else.
2. Respect: Democracy thrives when we recognize that others also act out of values—even if they are not our own.
3. Balance: No single value can dominate a society without distortion. Freedom without responsibility breeds inequality. Solidarity without innovation risks stagnation. The art of politics is holding values in tension.

— — —

A value-based society is not one where one set of values triumphs unchallenged. It is one where citizens and leaders alike recognize that every decision is rooted in values—and that democracy is the arena where these values are tested, contested, and negotiated.

So when we call for “more value-based politics,” we should clarify what we mean. Not more values, but the right values. Not a battle over whether values matter, but over which ones will shape the schools we teach in, the businesses we build, and the nations we belong to.

In the end, democracy itself is a value—one that insists no single vision has a monopoly on truth, and that the future belongs to the patient work of building together across our differences.