Democracy Paradox

More Information

Email the show at [email protected]

Follow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast

Democracy Paradox is part of the Amazon Affiliates Program and earns commissions on items purchased from links to the Amazon website. All links are to recommended books discussed in the podcast or referenced in the blog.

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Kathryn Stoner on How Putin’s War has Ruined Russia

Naunihal Singh on the Myth of the Coup Contagion

29 november 2022 | 42 min

Mohammed Ali Kadivar on Paths to Durable Democracy and Thoughts on the Protests in Iran

22 november 2022 | 60 min

Michael Ignatieff Warns Against the Politics of Enemies

15 november 2022 | 39 min

Emilee Booth Chapman Has Ideas About Voting with Profound Implications

8 november 2022 | 47 min

Jason Brownlee Believes We Underestimate Democratic Resilience

1 november 2022 | 41 min

Allie Funk of Freedom House Assesses Global Internet Freedom

25 oktober 2022 | 41 min

Jeremi Suri on America's Unfinished Fight for Democracy

18 oktober 2022 | 42 min

Frank Dikötter on the History of China After Mao

11 oktober 2022 | 43 min

Larry Diamond on Supporting Democracy in the World and at Home

4 oktober 2022 | 41 min

Lynn Vavreck on the 2020 Election and the Challenge to American Democracy

27 september 2022 | 37 min

Sarah Cook on China's Expanding Global Media Influence

20 september 2022 | 40 min

Constitution Makers on Constitution Making: Hassen Ebrahim on South Africa's Constitution

19 september 2022 | 52 min

Simon Usherwood on Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and the Nested Games of British Politics

6 september 2022 | 47 min

Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way on the Durable Authoritarianism of Revolutionary Regimes

30 augusti 2022 | 43 min

Laura Gamboa on Opposition Strategies to Resist Democratic Erosion

23 augusti 2022 | 41 min

Kim Lane Scheppele on Hungary, Viktor Orbán, and its Democratic Decline

16 augusti 2022 | 50 min

Jessica Pisano on How Zelenskyy Changed Ukraine

9 augusti 2022 | 36 min

Neil DeVotta on the Protests in Sri Lanka

2 augusti 2022 | 39 min

Aynne Kokas on the Intersection Between Surveillance Capitalism and Chinese Sharp Power (or How Much Does the CCP Already Know About You?)

26 juli 2022 | 45 min

Michael McFaul and Robert Person on Putin, Russia, and the War in Ukraine

19 juli 2022 | 36 min

There are a lot of people quietly who are deeply frustrated with this war. Every rich person in Russia with one or two exceptions are frustrated with this war. I think many of the so-called liberal technocratic elites in the government are frustrated with this war. Lots of regional leaders are frustrated with this war. It's not just the vocal opposition. I think there's a quiet minority and maybe even majority that is exhausted with what Putin has done.

Michael McFaul

Support Democracy Paradox on Patreon for bonus episodes and exclusive updates and information.

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, is professor of political science at Stanford University, director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and Peter and Helen Bing Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. His most recent book is From Cold War to Hot Peace: An American Ambassador in Putin’s Russia (2018). Robert Person is associate professor of international relations at the U.S. Military Academy, director of its international affairs curriculum, and faculty affiliate at its Modern War Institute. Their essay "What Putin Fears Most" was published as an online exclusive from the Journal of Democracy in February and was included in the April 2022 issue.

Key Highlights

Introduction 0:48
Personal Account from Michael McFaul 3:16
Putin's Objectives 7:44
What would Russia be like without Putin? 12:22
Challenges for democracy in Ukraine 20:10
Effectiveness of sanctions 24:15
Where is the Russian Revolution going? 27:11

Key Links

Learn more about Michael McFaul

"What Putin Fears Most" by Robert Person and Michael McFaul in the Journal of Democracy

From Cold War To Hot Peace: An American Ambassador in Putin's Russia by Michael McFaul

Democracy Paradox Podcast

Marta Dyczok and Andriy Kulokov on the Media, Information Warriors, and the Future of Ukraine

More Information

Email the show at [email protected]

Follow on Twitter @DemParadox

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Nic Cheeseman and Gabrielle Lynch on the Moral Economy of Elections in Africa

Scott Mainwaring on Argentina and a Final Reflection on Democracy in Hard Places

12 juli 2022 | 44 min

Lucan Way on Ukraine. Democracy in Hard Places

5 juli 2022 | 41 min

Michael Coppedge on Why Democracies Emerge, Why They Decline, and Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem)

28 juni 2022 | 36 min

Rachel Beatty Riedl on Benin. Democracy in Hard Places.

21 juni 2022 | 47 min

Ashutosh Varshney on India. Democracy in Hard Places

14 juni 2022 | 55 min

Evan Lieberman on South Africa. Democracy in Hard Places

7 juni 2022 | 49 min

When you hear people talk in such disparaging tones, that everything is broken, that nothing is possible, you need to ask yourself, is that right? When you look around, the answer is no. There are these examples where things do go right, where people work together and create a neighborhood or a community for themselves in which they can be prosperous and build better lives. And that's really what the democratic project is all about.

Evan Lieberman

Support Democracy Paradox on Patreon for bonus episodes and exclusive updates and information.

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

Evan Lieberman is a Professor of Political Science and Contemporary Africa at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Director of the MIT Global Diversity Lab, and the faculty director of the MIT International Science and Technology Initiatives (MISTI). He is the coauthor with Rorisang Lekalake of the recent article "South Africa's Resilient Democracy" in the Journal of Democracy and author of the forthcoming book Until We Have Won Our Liberty: South Africa after Apartheid.

Key Highlights

Why is Evan Lieberman optimistic about democracy in South Africa
Role of Nelson Mandela on South Africa's democracy
Importance of South Africa for democracy in the world
Account of the housing community Ethembalethu
What the 2019 election says about democracy in South Africa

Key Links

Until We Have Won Our Liberty: South Africa after Apartheid by Evan Lieberman

"South Africa’s Resilient Democracy" by Evan Lieberman and Rorisang Lekalake in Journal of Democracy

Learn more about Evan Lieberman at www.evanlieberman.org

Follow Evan Lieberman on Twitter @evlieb

Democracy in Hard Places edited by Scott Mainwaring and Tarek Masoud

Democracy Paradox Podcast

Dan Slater on Indonesia

More Information

Email the show at [email protected]

Follow on Twitter @DemParadox

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Ronald Deibert from Citizen Lab on Cyber Surveillance, Digital Subversion, and Transnational Repression

Dan Slater on Indonesia. Democracy in Hard Places

31 maj 2022 | 51 min

Kathryn Stoner on How Putin's War has Ruined Russia

24 maj 2022 | 41 min

Scott Radnitz on Why Conspiracy Theories Thrive in Both Democracies and Autocracies

17 maj 2022 | 52 min

There's something natural and organic about perceiving that the people in power are out to advance their own interests. It's in part because it’s often true. Governments actually do keep secrets from the public. Politicians engage in scandals. There often is corruption at high levels. So, we don't want citizens in a democracy to be too trusting of their politicians. It's healthy to be skeptical of the state and its real abuses and tendencies towards secrecy. The danger is when this distrust gets redirected, not toward the state, but targets innocent people who are not actually responsible for people's problems.

Scott Radnitz

Support Democracy Paradox on Patreon for bonus episodes and exclusive updates and information.

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

*Please note during the interview the host says "conspiracy" rather than "conspiracy theory." The transcript has been corrected.*

Scott Radnitz is an associate professor of Russian and Eurasian Studies at the University of Washington and the director of the Ellison Center for Russian, Eastern European, and Central Asian Studies. He is the author of Revealing Schemes: The Politics of Conspiracy in Russia and the Post-Soviet Region and coeditor with Harris Mylonas of the forthcoming book Enemies Within: The Global Politics of Fifth Columns. His article “Why Democracy Fuels Conspiracy Theories” was recently published in the Journal of Democracy.

Key Highlights

Conspiracy theories Russia uses to justify their invasion of Ukraine
Why Russia relies on conspiracy theories in its political rhetoric
The use of conspiracy theories in democracies and autocracies
The recent proliferation of conspiracy theories in the United States
How to mitigate the harmful effects of conspiracy theories in politics

Key Links

"Why Democracy Fuels Conspiracy Theories" by Scott Radnitz in Journal of Democracy

Revealing Schemes: The Politics of Conspiracy in Russia and the Post-Soviet Region by Scott Radnitz

Enemies Within: The Global Politics of Fifth Columns edited by Harris Mylonas and Scott Radnitz

Democracy Paradox Podcast

Moisés Naím on the New Dynamics of Political Power

More Information

Email the show at [email protected]

Follow on Twitter @DemParadox

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Can America Preserve Democracy without Retreating from it? Robert C. Lieberman on the Four Threats

Dan Banik is In Pursuit of Development

13 maj 2022 | 37 min

Ronald Deibert from Citizen Lab on Cyber Surveillance, Digital Subversion, and Transnational Repression

10 maj 2022 | 52 min

Thomas Piketty on Equality

3 maj 2022 | 32 min

Marta Dyczok and Andriy Kulykov on the Media, Information Warriors, and the Future of Ukraine

26 april 2022 | 54 min

Yascha Mounk on the Great Experiment of Diverse Democracies

19 april 2022 | 51 min

Mark Beissinger on Contemporary Urban Civic Revolutions

12 april 2022 | 51 min

Craig Whitlock on the Lessons Learned in Afghanistan

5 april 2022 | 59 min

Miles Rapoport on How We Can Achieve Universal Voting

29 mars 2022 | 47 min

Between Russia and China: Anja Mihr on Central Asia

22 mars 2022 | 53 min

Moisés Naím on the New Dynamics of Political Power

15 mars 2022 | 38 min

Jennifer Brick Murtazashvili and Ilia Murtazashvili on Afghanistan, Local Institutions, and Self-Governance

8 mars 2022 | 49 min

Sarah Repucci from Freedom House with an Update on Freedom in the World

1 mars 2022 | 42 min

Elisabeth Ivarsflaten and Paul Sniderman on the Inclusion and Respect of Muslim Minorities

22 februari 2022 | 46 min

Debasish Roy Chowdhury and John Keane on the Decline of Indian Democracy

15 februari 2022 | 55 min

Lisa Disch on Representation, Constituencies, and Political Leadership

8 februari 2022 | 50 min

Joseph Fishkin on the Constitution, American History, and Economic Inequality

1 februari 2022 | 50 min

Bilal Baloch on Indira Gandhi, India's Emergency, and the Importance of Ideas in Politics

25 januari 2022 | 46 min

Sara Wallace Goodman on Citizen Responses to Democratic Threats

18 januari 2022 | 44 min

Joseph Wright and Abel Escribà-Folch on Migration's Potential to Topple Dictatorships

11 januari 2022 | 47 min

Robert Lieberman, Kenneth Roberts, and David Bateman on Democratic Resilience and Political Polarization in the United States

4 januari 2022 | 58 min

So, the question is how do you respond to that? If you are the party that sees itself as being on the side of democracy and on the side of maintaining democratic norms and procedures and maintaining this kind of democratic accountability, how do you respond? Do you respond in kind? Do you respond with hardball tactics of your own?

Robert Lieberman

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com or a short review of Democratic Resilience: Can the United States Withstand Rising Polarization? here.

Robert C. Lieberman is the Krieger-Eisenhower Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University. Kenneth M. Roberts is the Richard J. Schwartz Professor of Government and Binenkorb Director of Latin American Studies at Cornell University. David A. Bateman is an associate professor in the Government Department at Cornell University. Robert and Kenneth (along with Suzanne Mettler) coedited the book Democratic Resilience: Can the United States Withstand Rising Polarization? David is a contributor to the volume. His chapter is "Elections, Polarization, and Democratic Resilience."

Key Highlights

Why did polarization become so severe in the United States?
When did pernicious polarization start in America?
Is polarization the fault of just one party or both?
Discussion on possible judicial reforms as a solution
Can America overcome this episode of severe polarization?

Key Links

Democratic Resilience: Can the United States Withstand Rising Polarization? by Suzanne Mettler, Robert C. Lieberman, and Kenneth M. Roberts

Follow Robert C. Lieberman on Twitter @r_lieberman

Follow David Bateman on Twitter @DavidAlexBatema

Democracy Paradox Podcast

Thomas Carothers and Andrew O’Donohue are Worried About Severe Polarization

More Information

Email the show at [email protected]

Follow on Twitter @DemParadox

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

James Loxton Explains Why Authoritarian Successor Parties Succeed in Democracies

Angus Deaton on Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism

28 december 2021 | 47 min

Zeynep Pamuk on the Role of Science and Expertise in a Democracy

21 december 2021 | 54 min

Caitlin Andrews-Lee on Charismatic Movements and Personalist Leaders

14 december 2021 | 51 min

Stephan Haggard and Robert Kaufman on Democratic Backsliding

7 december 2021 | 46 min

Joshua Yaffa on Truth, Ambition, and Compromise in Putin's Russia

30 november 2021 | 50 min

Zoltan Barany on the Ineffectiveness of the Gulf Militaries

23 november 2021 | 53 min

Amory Gethin on Political Cleavages, Inequality, and Party Systems in 50 Democracies

16 november 2021 | 54 min

Indeed, the moderation of left-wing party’s economic policy proposals in the eighties and in the nineties and the decision to promote an unregulated capitalism with no kind of proper compensation and no tax harmonization leading to greater offshore wealth and rising inequality. All these decisions have played a role in leading the working class to take distance from these parties and, at the same time, enabling these new issues to take a growing importance.

Amory Gethin

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com or a short review of Political Cleavages and Social Inequalities: A Study of 50 Democracies, 1948-2020 here.

Amory Gethin is a PhD candidate at the Paris School of Economics and a research fellow at the world Inequality Lab. He is a coeditor (along with Clara Martinez-Toledano and Thomas Piketty) of Political Cleavages and Social Inequalities: A Study of 50 Democracies, 1948-2020.

Key Highlights Include

Why have multi-elite party systems emerged in Western democracies?
Describes the divide between the "Brahmin Left" and "Merchant Right"
How do party systems differ between Western and Non-Western democracies?
Descriptions of party systems in India, Eastern Europe, and Brazil
Why have party systems changed?

Key Links

Political Cleavages and Social Inequalities. A Study of 50 Democracies, 1948-2020 edited by Amory Gethin, Clara Martinez-Toledano and Thomas Piketty

Follow Amory Gethin on Twitter @amorygethin

Learn more about Amory Gethin at his personal website

Democracy Paradox Podcast

Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the Plutocratic Populism of the Republican Party

More Information

Email the show at [email protected]

Follow on Twitter @DemParadox

Follow on Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Daniel Brinks on the Politics of Institutional Weakness

9 november 2021 | 54 min

Elizabeth Perry and Grzegorz Ekiert on State-Mobilized Movements

2 november 2021 | 51 min

Susan Rose-Ackerman on the Role of the Executive in Four Different Democracies

26 oktober 2021 | 45 min

Tom Ginsburg Shares his Thoughts on Democracy and International Law

19 oktober 2021 | 52 min

Robert Meister Believes Justice is an Option

12 oktober 2021 | 51 min

Martin Conway Believes "Democracy Owes its Durability Not to its Principles but to its Flexibility." Democracy in Western Europe from 1945 to 1968

5 oktober 2021 | 55 min

Donald Horowitz on the Formation of Democratic Constitutions

28 september 2021 | 51 min

Guillermo Trejo and Sandra Ley on the Political Logic of Criminal Wars in Mexico

21 september 2021 | 55 min

Rana Siu Inboden on China and the International Human Rights Regime

14 september 2021 | 51 min

Timothy Frye Says Putin is a Weak Strongman

7 september 2021 | 49 min

Kathryn Stoner on Russia's Economy, Politics, and Foreign Policy

31 augusti 2021 | 39 min

Karen Greenberg on the War on Terror, Donald Trump, and American Democracy

24 augusti 2021 | 46 min

Charles Kupchan on America's Tradition of Isolationism

17 augusti 2021 | 52 min

Aldo Madariaga on Neoliberalism, Democratic Deficits, and Chile

10 augusti 2021 | 46 min

Roger Lee Huang on Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi, and the Tatmadaw

3 augusti 2021 | 48 min

Mallory SoRelle on the Politics of Consumer Credit

27 juli 2021 | 52 min

David Stasavage on Early Democracy and its Decline

20 juli 2021 | 47 min

Christophe Jaffrelot on Narendra Modi and Hindu Nationalism

13 juli 2021 | 51 min

Jan-Werner Müller on Democracy Rules

6 juli 2021 | 49 min

Dorothy Sue Cobble on the Full Rights Feminists

29 juni 2021 | 52 min

Freedom House: Sarah Repucci Assesses Freedom in the World

22 juni 2021 | 45 min

Michael Miller on the Unexpected Paths to Democratization

15 juni 2021 | 47 min

Daniel Carpenter Revisits the Petition in 19th Century America

8 juni 2021 | 48 min

Sebastian Strangio Explains the Relationship Between China and Southeast Asia

1 juni 2021 | 46 min

Can America Preserve Democracy without Retreating from it? Robert C. Lieberman on the Four Threats

25 maj 2021 | 50 min

Kurt Weyland Distinguishes Between Fascism and Authoritarianism

18 maj 2021 | 55 min

James Loxton Explains Why Authoritarian Successor Parties Succeed in Democracies

11 maj 2021 | 56 min

Derek W. Black Says Public Education Represents the Idea of America... Not its Reality

4 maj 2021 | 53 min

Sheryl WuDunn Paints a Picture of Poverty in America and Offers Hope for Solutions

27 april 2021 | 48 min

Mike Hoffman on How Religious Identities Influence Support for or Opposition to Democracy

20 april 2021 | 55 min

Shari Davis Elevates Participatory Budgeting

13 april 2021 | 54 min

Chris Bickerton Defines Technopopulism

6 april 2021 | 45 min

Ross Benes on Nebraska and Rural Conservatism

30 mars 2021 | 47 min

The legislature is one of several examples of our history of being independent which is why I think it was such an important story to tell of Nebraska becoming like baptized into Republican orthodoxy. Because seeing that shift. That it wasn't always that way. We founded Arbor day in this state, we settle a lot of refugees per capita, we increased minimum wage, and Medicaid through ballot measures recently. We do stuff like that.
- Ross Benes

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

Red states and blue states. Republicans and Democrats. Rural and urban. Polarization. It is a term often heard about American politics. Most states find their politics lean heavily toward one party or the other. And Nebraska is no different. It is a very conservative state so it makes sense for it to elect Republicans.

But not too long ago Democrats competed for state offices. In fact, Nebraska had at least one Democratic Senator from 1977 until 2012. It’s really only been the last ten years where Democrats could not compete in the state.

Of course, the Democrats it elected were about as conservative as many Republicans. But Nebraska also has a history of progressive reforms. In fact, it was often rural America who championed many of the progressive ideas in the early twentieth century.

This realization has caused me to go through a variety of different counterfactuals. Like why are rural Americans conservative and urban Americans liberal? Is there a scenario where this is reversed? I’m not looking to rewrite history. I just want to understand how politics change over time. And maybe where it is going next. Because history shows some of the things we take for granted have not always been that way.

My guest Ross Benes grew up in Nebraska before moving to New York City. He has the kind of expat perspective that has given so many writers both clarity and insight. His recent book is Rural Rebellion: How Nebraska Became a Republican Stronghold.

Ross and I, we discuss why Democrats no longer compete in Nebraska. But I don’t want anyone to think Nebraska has to elect Democrats to prove their commitment to democracy. That’s not the point. Nebraska is one of many states with very little genuine competition between parties for statewide office. My concern is effective governance needs a range of perspectives to succeed. And this problem is not unique to Nebraska nor are many liberal states immune.

More Information

Rural Rebellion: How Nebraska Became a Republican Stronghold by Ross Benes

Our Body Politic

Key Links

Fighting Liberal by George Norris

The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker by Katherine Cramer

Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the Plutocratic Populism of the Republican Party

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Chad Alan Goldberg on the Wisconsin Idea and the Role of the Public University in a Democracy

23 mars 2021 | 55 min

They had an obligation to take the knowledge that they were developing, to take their expertise and put it in the service of the community as a whole and the service of its elected leaders.

Chad Alan Goldberg

A Fulll Transcript is Available at www.democracyparadox.com.

At the turn of the twentieth century, Wisconsin was at the forefront of the Progressive Movement. Wisconsin adopted the first modern state income tax. It initiated the first workers’ compensation plan. It enacted the first unemployment insurance program. Wisconsin even spearheaded important constitutional reforms like the direct election of Senators. UW Madison Professor Patrick Brenzel explains, “To say that Wisconsin was known nationally for transparent and egalitarian government is an understatement.”

These reforms were the product of a relationship between the public university, legislators, and other stakeholders. It is known as the Wisconsin Idea. The Wisconsin Idea is a belief the public university has a role to contribute its research to the service of the state. A common motto is “The boundaries of the university are the boundaries of the state.”

The Wisconsin Idea remains central to the mission of the University of Wisconsin system to this day, but has become the subject of attacks from conservatives in recent years. Among the many efforts by Scott Walker to dismantle the administrative state included an attempt to remove the Wisconsin Idea from the university charter. It failed, but it highlights how there is a genuine debate about the role of public universities.

Chad Alan Goldberg has been at the forefront of the effort to defend the Wisconsin Idea in recent years. He is a professor of sociology at the University of Wisconsin Madison and the editor of the volume Education for Democracy: Renewing the Wisconsin Idea. This book features chapters from many leading scholars in a variety of disciplines including Kathy Cramer.

Our conversation discusses some of the history behind the Wisconsin Idea. But it is really about the role of the public university. How is a public university different from a private university? Why does the public support universities? And how does a public university help to shape democracy? These are important questions I never thought to ask, but will mean a lot as we work to renew democracy.

More Information

Education for Democracy: Renewing the Wisconsin Idea

Politics in Question

Key Links

The Wisconsin Idea by Charles McCarthy

The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker by Katherine Cramer

Zizi Papacharissi Dreams of What Comes After Democracy

Thoughts on John Dewey's Democracy and Education

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Elizabeth Nugent on Polarization, Democratization and the Arab Spring

16 mars 2021 | 53 min

The focus on the individual people involved in this moment and their preexisting relationships for me is a new way of thinking about democratic transitions. Because I think we see how much these personal relationships and personal histories matter for whether or not they can make these really big, important decisions at a moment of very high stress, very little information.

Elizabeth Nugent

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

Elizabeth Nugent believes political polarization derailed Egyptian democratization, while the lack of severe polarization has allowed Tunisian democracy to survive. But what makes her work remarkable is she argues Egyptian polarization was the outcome of targeted repression under authoritarian rule. At the same time, Tunisia avoided polarization because repression was more widespread. Stop and think about this for a moment. Tunisian democracy succeeds today because of a legacy of widespread, indiscriminate repression. It affected everyone so opposition groups learned to work together and even sympathized with one another.

This is a truly counterintuitive insight. But it makes so much sense at the same time. Liz Nugent’s new book is After Repression: How Polarization Derails Democratic Transition. She is an assistant professor at Yale University with a focus on Middle Eastern politics. Her book uses the cases of Egypt and Tunisia to explain her ideas, but her thoughts on polarization will make waves as they are used in other contexts.

Our conversation discusses Tunisia and Egypt. We also talk about how polarization affects democratization. But I find it most interesting how Liz emphasizes the political process requires real relationships with real people. She reminds us a very human element is necessary for democracy and democratization.

More Information

Elizabeth Nugent's Home Page

Apes of the State created all Music

Democracy in Danger

Key Links

After Repression: How Polarization Derails Democratic Transition

Yale MacMillan Center Council on Middle East Studies

Jonathan Pinckney on Civil Resistance Transitions

Thoughts on Samuel Huntington's The Third Wave

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Pop-Up Civics in 21st Century America: Understanding the Political Potential of Placemaking

Ryan Salzman is an Evangelist for Placemaking

9 mars 2021 | 53 min

Like so many things we're coming to grips with now in the 21st century, we're realizing that the 20th century was the anomaly. We feel like what was happening in the first 20 years of the 21st century that that was the anomaly. But it's not. The 20th century was the anomaly. And there's a temptation among policymakers to say, ‘But this is how it's always been.’ No. Wrong.

Ryan Salzman

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

I live in Carmel, Indiana and in May The Farmers’ Market opens. It’s in a small public space between a concert hall called The Palladium and the Booth Tarkington Theatre. The Monon Bike Trail runs alongside it and there is bike parking sponsored by the Mayor’s Youth Council. Live bands play in the center of the market. In the winter, the same space is used for an n outdoor ice skating rink surrounded by a German Christkindlmarkt. This is what Ryan Salzman describes as placemaking.

Placemaking does not just transform public spaces. It expands them. Placemaking changes how we experience our community and establishes new landmarks. And whether we want to admit it or not, this is political. Placemaking involves the creation and distribution of public goods.

Local governments make decisions over whether to embrace or prevent placemaking. For example, teenagers can paint a beautiful mural on a public building. Elected officials will decide whether to send a thank you or a citation.

Ryan Salzman has studied the phenomenon of placemaking in his home of Bellevue, Kentucky and in other communities across the United States. He is a professor of political science at Northern Kentucky University and the author of Pop-Up Civics in 21st Century America: Understanding the Political Potential of Placemaking. He has experienced placemaking as an academic, an elected city councilman, and an active participant.

Ryan’s work caught my attention because it examines local engagement through a novel lens. It considers political behavior that the participants probably don’t realize is political. It moves beyond theories of deliberative and direct democracy to consider ways everyday citizens produce meaningful action. Ryan and I have a light hearted conversation. But I don’t want to overlook the significant implications of placemaking for political science and political theory. I am excited for Ryan to share his stories and ideas. So it’s about time I introduce you to Ryan Salzman…

Key Links

Black Lives Matter Mural in Cincinnati, Ohio

ArtPlace America

Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell on Mending Democracy

Thoughts on Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone

More Information

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

www.democracyinafrica.org

Kajri Jain Believes Democracy Unfolds through the Aesthetic

2 mars 2021 | 58 min

Nic Cheeseman and Gabrielle Lynch on the Moral Economy of Elections in Africa

23 februari 2021 | 47 min

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

It’s common for Westerners to lecture Africans about democracy. Most Africans will admit their different political systems have many problems. Money is exchanged for votes, elections are rigged, and sometimes violence even breaks out. But the challenges African countries face in the process of democratization are not absent in the rest of the world.

The 2020 American Presidential Election exposed many problems in the United States. The storming of the American capital proved that even violence is possible in the world’s oldest democracy. My point here is not to disparage American democracy, but to recognize every nation has a lot to learn.

Nic Cheeseman and Gabrielle Lynch along with Justin Willis offer us an opportunity to consider democracy in an unfamiliar context. Their examination of Ghana, Kenya, and Uganda allow us to identity universal aspirations and ideals citizens hold in very different settings. But it’s not the differences which I believe are important. It’s their similarities.

Nic, Gabrielle, and Justin are the authors of the book The Moral Economy of Elections in Africa: Democracy, Voting, and Virtue. Nic is the kind of political science rock star who gets quoted in The Economist. He is among the foremost experts on democracy in Africa, a professor of political science and democracy at the University of Birmingham in the UK, and the co-editor of the website Democracy in Africa. Gabrielle Lynch is a professor of comparative politics at the University of Warwick.

I invited Nic and Gabrielle to discuss their new book, because their research is always informative, not just because it exposes us to another part of the world, but because they are able to draw connections to larger ideas from their experiences. This is a conversation about Africa. This is a conversation about democracy. This is my conversation with Nic Cheeseman and Gabrielle Lynch…

Music from Apes of the State.

Key Content

Ghana: The Ebbing Power of Incumbency

The Moral Economy of Elections in Africa

Thomas Carothers and Andrew O'Donohue are Worried About Severe Polarization

Thoughts on Brian Klaas and Nic Cheeseman's How to Rig an Election

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Democracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarization

Thomas Carothers and Andrew O'Donohue are Worried About Severe Polarization

16 februari 2021 | 55 min

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

My thoughts on polarization have changed over the past few years. On the one hand, polarization can be a danger to democracy. Milan Svolik among others have shown how strong ideological positions lead some voters to support leaders they know are undemocratic. Moreover, democracy depends on the willingness of both parties to make compromises to govern effectively.

But on the other hand, there are issues where compromise itself is undemocratic. How do you compromise on the right to vote? Is it polarizing to refuse to waiver on issues of human rights? What about the rule of law? Sometimes compromise does not protect democracy, but endangers it.

A lot of intelligent people have strong opinions about polarization. But few of them have thought deeply about the subject or read much of the literature. It’s a complicated subject. Last year Ezra Klein published a surprising book called Why We’re Polarized. It’s actually an impressive work of scholarship from someone who does not consider himself a scholar. But when he says “we’re polarized” he refers to an American experience. He largely ignores the polarization around the world in places like Venezuela, Poland, and India.

So I reached out to Thomas Carothers and Andrew O’Donohue because I wanted to better understand polarization not just in the United States but as a wider global phenomenon. Tom and Andrew are the editors of s remarkable volume called Democracies Divided from 2019. Last year they published a supplement called Political Polarization in South and Southeast Asia: Old Divisions, New Dangers. Tom is the Senior Vice President for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is a legendary scholar in the field of democracy promotion. Andrew is a nonresident assistant at Carnegie as well. He is also in the PhD program in Harvard’s Department of Government.

Together they offer reflections on polarization in different contexts. They help explain how each is different and where they commonalities. Most of all this broader examination helps us think about polarization in very different ways.

Email me at [email protected]
Follow me on Twitter @DemParadox

Key Links

Political Polarization in South and Southeast Asia: Old Divisions, New Dangers

Rejuvenating Democracy Promotion

Lee Drutman Makes the Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Thoughts on Chantal Mouffe's On the Political

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

"Can Democracy Survive the Internet?"

Can Democracy Survive the Internet? Nate Persily and Josh Tucker on Social Media and Democracy

9 februari 2021 | 49 min

A complete transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

Over the past ten years social media has reshaped politics. Fake news and political disinformation have become a part of the political discourse. But social media has also brought about meaningful change through the #metoo and #blacklivesmatter movements.

Social media has allowed dissident voices to express themselves in authoritarian regimes, but it has also given a platform to anti-democratic views in Western Nations. It has reawakened our sense of fairness, while it has brought to light some of our darkest demons. In the final analysis, social media is both a problem and an opportunity. And your outlook probably depends on the last headline you saw on Twitter or Facebook.

Nate Persily and Josh Tucker are at the forefront of conversations on the role of social media in politics and its influence on democracy. Nate is a professor of law at Stanford, but also has a PhD in political science. He has long been an expert in election law, but has also become among the foremost scholars on the politics of social media and the internet. Among his many roles, he is the co-director of the Stanford Cyber Policy Center.

Josh is a professor of political science at NYU. He specializes in post-communist politics and is the Director of NYU’s Jordan Center for Advanced Study of Russia. But he is also a faculty director at the Center for Social Media and Politics.

Together Nate and Josh edited a volume called Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field and Prospects for Reform. It is available to download on the Cambridge University Press website. I highly encourage policymakers, researchers, and anyone who is curious to take a look. It features important contributions from well-known scholars such as Francis Fukuyama and Pablo Barberá on a wide range of relevant topics.

In this conversation you will learn why Nate and Josh are at the forefront of research on social media. They rattle off multiple studies their teams conducted that produced groundbreaking research. Now, I have read many articles about the ways social media influences politics, but this is my first podcast where I really grapple with the challenges of the internet. I was fortunate to do so with two of the field’s most important researchers today.

Key Links

"From Liberation to Turmoil"

Securing American Elections: Prescriptions for Enhancing the Integrity and Independence of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election and Beyond

Winston Mano on Social Media and Politics in Africa... And what America can Learn from Africa about Democracy

Thoughts on Cristina Flesher Fominaya's Democracy Reloaded

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Paul Robinson on Russian Conservatism

Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the Plutocratic Populism of the Republican Party

2 februari 2021 | 50 min

Bryn Rosenfeld on Middle Class Support for Dictators in Autocratic Regimes

26 januari 2021 | 47 min

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.

Barrington Moore famously claimed, “No bourgeoisie. No democracy.” Many scholars before and after Moore have argued the middle class is necessary for successful democratization. But Moore had a specific image of the middle class. The bourgeoisie were not simply white-collar professionals. They were entrepreneurs who were independent of the landed aristocracy.

Bryn Rosenfeld recognizes a new source for the growth of the middle class. Many authoritarian regimes have established a state dependent middle class. A professional class who relies on the state bureaucracy for employment and think differently about their relationship to the regime than the bourgeoisie Barrington Moore portrayed.

Scholars have long recognized the heterogeneity of the middle class even while they described them as a homogenous group. The diverse interests and perspectives are part of what leads the middle class to demand democracy. But Bryn Rosenfeld finds there is also an autocratic middle class who rely on the state for their status and position. They view the process of democratization as a labyrinth of risk and uncertainty.

Bryn Rosenfeld is an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University. She is the author of The Autocratic Middle Class: How State Dependency Reduces the Demand for Democracy. Bryn is part of a new generation of comparative political scientists who blend field research with rigorous quantitative research designs to produce new insights into political behavior.

I have read my share of books on democracy published in 2020. Some are well-written. Others offer deep insights. So far, this is the most consequential book on democracy I have come across from last year. I do not doubt scholars will refer to its conclusions for years to come. It astonishes me this is Bryn’s first book. I expect to come across her name again in the future.

Related Content

Erica Chenoweth on Civil Resistance

Thoughts on Barrington Moore's Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Zizi Papacharissi Dreams of What Comes After Democracy

19 januari 2021 | 57 min

Political theorist Takis Pappas has described the formation of liberal democracy as an elite project. Its creation was dependent on the decisions of political leaders rather than the public. But over the subsequent decades the space between politicians and their constituents has grown smaller. It is now unclear whether elected officials remain political leaders or whether they simply follow the opinions of their constituents.

Democracy is in the process of a transformation. Politicians have abdicated responsibility for political power to the people, but the people do not share a sense of responsibility for this newfound political power. So, everyone blames each other for political conflict, but nobody accepts the responsibility to resolve it. It is not clear anyone completely understands what democracy is or what it will become.

Robert Dahl imagined the possibility of a third transformation of democracy into something deeper, thicker, and richer. But he never explained how this new sense of democracy might manifest itself. Dahl thought more about democracy than anyone has before or since.

So I have searched for the next incarnation of Robert Dahl but have failed to discover her or him. These conversations are my attempt to piece together the ideas from multiple perspectives about democracy to offer an updated theory of democratic governance.

Populism, of course, is the great challenge for democracy today. Many scholars have offered institutional solutions as an antidote to populism. But the challenges democracy faces are not an American problem. They exist across the globe. They persist in Presidential and Parliamentary systems. It is a deeper challenge within the demos itself.

I believe democracy will inevitably overcome the populist challenge. It will emerge from this crisis stronger and healthier. Fifty years from now democracy will be different than it is today. And in five hundred years, its institutions may even be unrecognizable. But I believe the answer exists.

Zizi Papacharissi has dared to imagine what our future may hold after democracy. The research for her remarkable book, After Democracy, took her around the world where she asked one hundred everyday citizens three simple questions:

1. What is democracy?

2. What is citizenship?

3. What might make democracy better?

The answers she received helped her imagine what might come after democracy. Zizi offers us a dream. She explained to me that she “wanted the book to have a dream-like feel, like a dream many people were having together or a polyphonic story they were simultaneously telling and listening to.”

Zizi Papacharissi is a professor of communication and political science at the University of Illinois-Chicago. She was among the first to study social media and has shaped the scholarship on political communication on the internet. Her name is a familiar sighting in the footnotes of many of the books and articles I read.

Our conversation explores the ideas in her book from many different angles. We talk about the meaning of democracy and the role of citizens. We think about how democracy might be reimagined. And she invites you to dream of what might come after democracy.

Notes
Website: www.democracyparadox.com

Music from Apes of the State

Related Content

Hélène Landem

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Winston Mano on Social Media and Politics in Africa... And what America can Learn from Africa about Democracy

12 januari 2021 | 58 min

Recent events in the United States have shown how even the most established democracies have much to learn about democracy. But my guest Winston Mano does not like to talk about democracy. He prefers to talk about democratization because the process never ends. Our conversation focuses on Africa with many topics discussed including social media, decolonization, and, of course, democracy. It concludes with a complex question, “What can America learn about democracy from Africa?”

When I ask this question, it is not intended to embarrass Americans, but to look for insights from abroad. Winston believes humility is critical in a successful democracy. Different parts of the globe have different lessons so there is always something to learn from others.

But for those who believe democratization is a linear process, my question won’t make any sense at all. America is widely viewed as farther along this process than any African nation. But Winston points out how technologies develop out of necessity. Some cultures “leapfrog” steps to develop new technologies outside the traditional sequence. Africa has even done this before. For example, Africa never experienced a Bronze Age. It went immediately into an Iron Age.

So, can Africa leapfrog America at this crossroads of democratization? I have no idea. But the current crisis of democracy requires a transformation in how it is both imagined and approached. So, the solutions may come from unlikely sources.

Winston Mano is a reader at the University of Westminster. He is also the principal editor of the Journal of African Media Studies. Alongside Martin Ndella, he edited the recent two volume publication Social Media and Elections in Africa.

Today’s conversation begins on the topic of social media in Africa. This is where I thought the conversation would remain. But recent events made it impossible to avoid a wider conversation on democracy.

Notes
Website: www.democracyparadox.com

Music from Apes of the State

Related Content

Jonathan Pinckney on Civil Resistance Transitions

George Lawson on Revolution

Thoughts on Florence Brisset-Foucault's Talkative Polity

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Michael Hughes on the History of Democracy in Germany

5 januari 2021 | 56 min

The German Question haunted international relations for generations. Like China, it was a rising authoritarian power. But its successful democratization after the Second World War cast an amnesia upon the uncertainty and anxiety it had caused the international community.

Today democracy in Germany is taken for granted. It is a force of democratic stability within Europe and in the world. Its journey from dictatorship to democracy is largely forgotten and its current challenges are often ignored.

Some of those challenges have surfaced in recent years. Hessian politician, Walter Lübcke , was assassinated by a far right extremist on June 2nd, 2019 and in August The New York Times reported that Neo-Nazis have established a presence in the ranks of the military and police.

Today’s guest Michael Hughes offers a helpful reminder, “Democracy may have prevailed in Germany… but conceptions remain contested… So, crucially, the story’s outcome cannot be an ending… for the process remains ongoing.” Michael is a professor of History at Wake Forest University. His research has focused on 19th and 20th Century German history. He is the author of the forthcoming book, Embracing Democracy in Modern Germany: Political Citizenship and Participation, 1871-2000.

I liked Michael’s book because it approaches history like political science. It focuses on the development of democracy through political culture. It is a thicker conception of democracy that goes beyond constitutions and institutions to consider democratization as a process.

My plan is to touch on the different regimes throughout Modern Germany’s history, but I also keep a focus on big picture trends. Don’t worry if you are not familiar with Germany. This is a good introduction, but more importantly this is about the process of democratization. The challenges and successes that countries face. This is how I chose to begin 2021. Looking back through history before we begin to move forward.

Notes
Website: www.democracyparadox.com
Music from Apes of the State

Related Content
Paul Robinson on Russian Conservatism

Yael Tamir on Nationalism

Thoughts on Sheri Berman's Democracy and Dictatorship in Europe: From the Ancien Régime to the Present Day

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Donald F. Kettl on Federalism

Lee Drutman Makes the Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

29 december 2020 | 49 min

Madison’s Federalist 10 makes an unusual case. He argued the size and diversity of the United States is a critical safeguard against the dominance of any single faction. Of course, it is well-known that the Founding Fathers were wary of all factions, political parties and, most of all, the tyranny of the majority. The American constitution is even described as counter majoritarian, because multiple avenues exist for entrenched minorities to prevail in the legislative process. But Madison was different. While he is credited as the father of the constitution, he was among the most majoritarian of all the founding fathers.

Still Madison was wary of strong, overwhelming majorities. He saw regional diversity as a check against majoritarianism. The size and diversity of the new nation meant any meaningful majority would be the result of significant compromise and deliberation.

Unfortunately, the two-party system, as it exists today, has undermined the Madisonian vision in Federalist 10. The two political parties fight for overwhelming majorities, but the inability of either party to prevail causes gridlock rather than compromise. Necessary reforms are stalled or delayed as they become rallying cries in a never-ending campaign cycle. This was never Madison’s intention.

Lee Drutman offers a solution to transform American democracy. His book Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America argues for proportional representation of the legislature and ranked-choice voting for the Presidency. But his intention is not about any one reform. Instead, his goal is to produce a multiparty democracy where no single party commands an absolute majority.

You may recognize Lee Drutman from articles he has written in The New York Times, Vox, and Five Thirty-Eight. He is also a Senior Fellow in the Political Reform Program at New America and a cohost of the podcast Politics in Question alongside Julia Azari and James Wallner.

The idea of multiparty democracy in the United States can seem radical, but like most reformers Drutman is a traditionalist at heart. He finds his inspiration in Madison’s vision of the American political system. Rather than designing something novel, Lee believes his reforms bring America closer to the original aims of the Founding Fathers. The United States has grown in its size and diversity. Nonetheless, the two political parties have reduced politics to a single dimension. Ultimately, Lee believes a more diverse party system is necessary to represent a diverse population. It’s a Madisonian case for the challenges of polarization and partisanship.

Thoughts on Suzanne Mettler and Robert Lieberman's Four Threats

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

John Gastil and Katherine Knobloch on Citizen Initiative Review

Hélène Landemore on Democracy without Elections

22 december 2020 | 53 min

The origin of the third wave of democratization is commonly dated to the Carnation Revolution in Portugal in 1974. The fall of the Soviet Union accelerated this process until about 2005 when the pace began to slow and it even began to reverse. But Robert Dahl thought about waves of democratization differently. He believed a democratic wave was more like a transformation. It was an intensification rather than a proliferation of democracy.

Dahl allows us to interpret the current rise of populism around the world not as a rejection of democracy, but as a challenge as democratic governance and ideals continue to evolve and transform. Or as Hélène Landemore puts it, “What you call the “crisis” of democracy can also be read as the growing pains of a system trying to adjust to the constraints of a globalized economy, an interconnected world, and rising democratic expectations.”

Hélène Landemore offers an alternative approach to imagine democratic governance. It is a democracy without elections or politicians. She calls it an Open Democracy. It relies on representative assemblies where members are selected through lottery kind of like a jury. Her approach encourages deliberation among ordinary citizens who better represent their communities and societies.

Many advocates have already embraced this novel approach. and it has already used in limited ways. We talk quite a bit about political theory, but also some real-world applications of these ideas. Indeed, Landemore has found inspiration in many of these examples like the constitutional assembly in Iceland or France’s citizen assembly on climate change. So these mini publics offer a novel way to consider the possibilities for democratic government without elections.

Hélène Landemore is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Yale University. She is the author of the book Open Democracy: Reinventing Popular Rule for the Twenty-First Century. Her research reconsiders the meaning of representation and legitimacy.

Robert Dahl was unclear of what the next transformation of democracy would become. I feel the same uncertainty. But I believe Hélène Landemore challenges us to consider new experiments in democracy happening right now. So perhaps a third transformation of democracy has already begun.

Thoughts on Cristina Flesher Fominaya's Democracy Reloaded

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Glenn Tiffert on the Manipulation of Academia by Foreign Governments

15 december 2020 | 50 min

This week America discovered some startling news. Russians hacked into the email systems of the Commerce and Treasury Departments. The information age has brought about a new era of intelligence and espionage. This was a blatant act of theft, but more subtle forms of espionage are available. Globalization has left many institutions vulnerable to foreign manipulation.

I invited Glenn Tiffert from the Hoover Institution to shed light on this phenomenon through a discussion of two of his recent publications. He is the editor of Global Engagement: Rethinking Risk in the Research Enterprise. It is an examination of the ways academic collaboration with China exposes vulnerabilities in our National Defense. It features a forward from former National Security Advisor, H.R. McMaster, and an introduction from icon of democracy scholarship, Larry Diamond.

The second publication is a report from the National Endowment for Democracy. It is titled, “Compromising the Knowledge Economy: Authoritarian Challenges to Independent Intellectual Inquiry.” This report explains how authoritarian regimes use sharp power to influence academic institutions.

Universities are the heart of political discourse in free societies. E.B. White once wrote, “The reading room of a college library is the very temple of democracy.” When foreign governments manipulate Western academia, it challenges an important source of democratic legitimacy. Larry Diamond explains, “This is more than a national security threat: It is an existential challenge to the entire global liberal order.”

Globalization has not simply brought about economic interdependence. It has extended the boundaries of political influence. The United States has long had the advantage of soft power to inspire people around the world. China has now found a form of sharp power to influence the United States in turn. The global order continues to change and evolve so it is incumbent on us to strengthen liberalism and democracy to overcome these challenges.

This conversation shares themes with recent episodes that featured John Ikenberry on liberal internationalism and Mareike Ohlberg on the Chinese Communist Party. This is a topic with multiple dimensions. It combines elements of national security with cornerstone values such as liberalism and democracy.

Related Content

More from Glenn Tiffert

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell on Mending Democracy

8 december 2020 | 65 min

There is a book that was written in 1989 called Democracy and its Critics. The renowned Robert Dahl is the author. In the book, he answers objections to critiques of democracy through a series of dialogues. One of them has stuck with me because I hear it so often: The problem with democracy is it is not democratic enough.

Many of the scholars who are featured on the Democracy Paradox have ideas or plans to make democracy more democratic. Many books, articles, and podcasts focus on ways to reform or redesign institutions so they can become more democratic. For example, Ezra Klein has a popular podcast. Every week he advocates for the Senate to drop the filibuster. Sure. Let’s do it. But we are delusional if we believe democracy is one reform away from perfection.

I invited Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan, and John Boswell to join me because they examine democracy reform through a multidimensional lens. Rather than offering a single blueprint to redesign our institutions, they suggest we should continue to mend the damage in our existing framework. It is an achievable call to action where they raise the profile of some everyday heroes who have made positive contributions to repair the connections vital to democracy.

Carolyn is an Associate Professor of Public Policy and Governance at Australian National University, Selen is an Associate Professor of Politics at the University of Canberra, and John is an Associate Professor of Politics at the University of Southampton. They are the authors of Mending Democracy: Democratic Repair in Disconnected Times.

It’s always interesting when my guests are in Australia because it works best for me to call in the afternoon or evening so they can be reached the morning of the next day. This conversation had an extra wrinkle because John is in the UK so we coordinated this call across three time zones on three continents.

Whenever this many people are on a podcast, it can become difficult to know who says what. For that I apologize. But it was necessary. Their work was a collaborative effort. Indeed, a work like theirs cannot be anything but collaborative. Their research is, in many ways, about collaboration.

Our conversation will introduce some important concepts and theories about deliberative democracy. But it also offers some real-world examples. I cannot wait for you to learn about the Knitting Nanas Against Gas. They call themselves KNAG. There is so much I want to share right now. But it’s best if I relax and just let you listen.

Notes
Website: www.democracyparadox.com
Music from Apes of the State

Relevant Past Episodes
John Gastil and Katherine Knobloch on Citizen Initiative Review
Jill Long Thompson on Character in a Democracy

Relevant Articles on Democracy Paradox
Thoughts on Adam Przeworski's Crises of Democracy
Thoughts on E.B. White's On Democracy
Thoughts on Florence Brisset-Foucault's Talkative Polity

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Mareike Ohlberg on the Global Influence of the Chinese Communist Party

1 december 2020 | 50 min

Last October Houston Rockets GM Daryl Morey shook the sports world with a tweet. It said, “Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong.” Pretty simple. Not controversial…. at least, not controversial in the United States. But China was offended. They cut off all economic ties with the Rockets and demanded an apology from the National Basketball Association. And they got one.

China uses its economic clout to shape the public discourse in business, academia, politics, and even sports. Its authoritarian impulse has no boundaries. Even citizens of liberal democracies are subject to its influence.

This is the third part of “Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism” about the global ascendance of China. My conversation with Mareike Ohlberg, a Senior Fellow at the German Marshall Fund, explores how the Communist Party of China extends its influence beyond its borders. She recently authored the book Hidden Hand: Exposing How the Chinese Communist Party is Reshaping the World with Clive Hamilton. They write in the opening lines of the first chapter, “The Chinese Communist Party is determined to transform the international order, to shape the world in its own image, without a shot being fired.”

China is imagined as a powerful, authoritarian state. Francis Fukuyama has described it as a strong state with weak rule of law. I disagree. China is a weak state with a strong party. Xi Jinping is described as the President of China, but his real power comes from his role as the Chairman of the Communist Party. The power of the CCP is neither subtle nor indirect. For example, the military is not a part of the government. It is a branch of the CCP.

China’s global ascendance is the ascendance of China’s Communist Party. It does not matter whether the CCP is committed to Marxism or Communism. The reality is it has always been authoritarian. It has never been supportive of liberalism nor democracy.

Recently, The Economist observed, “The achievement of the Trump administration was to recognize the authoritarian threat from China. The task of the Biden administration will be to work out what to do about it.” There is a bipartisan consensus in the US that China represents a threat to America. Something must be done. We just need to figure out what that “something” is.

Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp.

Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Michel de Certeau's classic The Practice of Everyday Life. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes.

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Xiaoyu Pu on China's Global Identities

23 november 2020 | 58 min

China is a nation of contradictions. It is a developing economy that is an economic powerhouse. It is a rising power that is already a great power. It is a communist state that has embraced capitalism. The dualism of yin and yang is not simply an element of Chinese philosophy. It is a source of modern Chinese identity.

This is part two of “Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism” about the global ascendance of China. Last week was about liberal internationalism. Next week will focus on the global influence of the Chinese Communist Party. Part 1 was about liberalism. Part 3 is about communism. This is Part 2 but it is not about capitalism.

This week will explore how China’s different sources of identity shape its foreign policy. It is about how an illiberal state adapts to a liberal world order. I want to convey the nuance and complexity of modern China as it exists today. So this week is not about capitalism but the juxtaposition of capitalism and communism. It is about the reconciliation of its many contradictions. And it is about the challenges for China to continue to evolve and transform.

The contradictions and complexities intrinsic to Chinese identity are present in its foreign policy. Xiaoyu Pu writes, “China’s grand strategy has no coherent blueprint, and there are competing visions for its emerging roles on the world stage. This is not to argue that Beijing has no grand strategy but rather that Beijing’s grand strategy includes contradictory elements.”

Xiaoyu is an Associate Professor of political science at the University of Nevada, Reno and the author of Rebranding China: Contested Status Signaling in the Changing Global Order. There is a lot to worry about China’s global ascendance. But Xiaoyu believes much of the alarm is overblown. Let me restate that he does not believe there is no cause for concern, but he does offer an alternative perspective.

Our conversation explores topics as diverse as the domestic politics in China to an analysis of its use of sharp power. We discuss not just China’s prospects for democratization, but whether China must democratize to become a dominant hegemonic power.

Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp.

Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed John Dewey's classic Democracy and Education. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes.

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

G. John Ikenberry on Liberal Internationalism

16 november 2020 | 55 min

Democracy is often imagined at its purest at a micro level. Town hall meetings are sometimes imagined as a simpler form of democratic governance, so international relations can feel as though it is miles away from democracy. Andy yet, it is the international liberal order which has brought about the vast proliferation of democracy around the world.

My guest, John Ikenberry, notes “Liberal democracy was both a national and an international project… Its institutions and ideals were premised on an expanding world of trade, exchange, and community.” Scholars talk about liberal democracy. Sometimes it is not clear whether liberalism depends on democracy or democracy depends on liberalism. It’s easy to assume liberalism is necessary to limit the dangers of democracy, but one of my favorite scholars, Sheri Berman, explains, “Liberalism unchecked by democracy can easily deteriorate into oligarchy or technocracy.” The two are linked.

G. John Ikenberry has written about liberal internationalism since the 1980s. He is a giant in the field of international relations. He is a Professor of Politics and International Relations at Princeton University and the author of the new book A World Safe for Democracy: Liberal Internationalism and the Crisis of Global Order. Our conversation explores political theory and international theory, but also American history and current events.

This is the first of my three-part episode arc about the global ascendance of China called “Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism.” We do not discuss China until the end of the conversation. This is not by accident. The purpose of this episode is to offer context. It’s impossible to grasp the impact of China until we explain the liberal international order and its importance.

My hope is you will have a stronger sense of what is at stake as we discuss China with two different scholars who have very different perspectives. This is a great conversation and a wonderful introduction for the next two weeks.

Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp.

Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Mark Beissinger's Nationalist Mobilization and the Collapse of the Soviet State. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes.

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

Amy Erica Smith on Politics and Religion in Brazil

9 november 2020 | 58 min

Political Scientist Seymour Martin Lipset wrote, “A person who knows only one country doesn't know any country because you're not sensitized to what is unique, what is different, what is special about your country.” Brazil offers a parallel to the United States because it has a populist President who is active on social media and has been indifferent to the pandemic and hostile to the environment. But it also has differences in culture, development, and religion.

The past week has largely been about the American Presidential Election for me. Like most of you my attention was focused on the results until this past weekend when Joe Biden was officially declared the winner. But now I am exhausted talking about American politics, so I invited Amy Erica Smith to discuss politics in Brazil. She is the author of Religion and Brazilian Democracy: Mobilizing the People of God and a Professor of Political Science at Iowa State University.

My conversation with Amy Erica is about Brazil, but in many ways, it is illuminating about the United States. Everyone will have theories about American politics after a consequential election. But an examination of other countries tests those assumptions in different contexts. Populist leaders have found success in many parts of the world, but Jair Bolsonaro feels eerily similar to Trump in so many ways. And yet, “Bolsonaro is a Brazilian invention.” Brian Winter writes in Foreign Affairs, “He is a product of the singularly awful economic and political crisis the country has endured over the last decade and, just as important, of Brazil’s long tradition of being ruled by conservative white men of military background.”

The most striking of those similarities and differences is the way religion has interacted with politics in Brazil. Amy Erica’s research is amazing. She is a political scientist’s political scientist but also part of a new generation of scholars who combine field research with statistical analysis to give anecdotal observations new meaning.

We cover a lot of ground in our conversation. We talk about Jair Bolsonaro. We discuss the Workers’ Party. We talk about Catholics, Evangelicals, and Pentecostals and... you really just need to listen.

This episode marks the start of my second season. Each episode stands alone so there is no theme or topic for each season. But I do feel the podcast has grown in its production and sophistication over the past 20 episodes. And the new election gives me a chance to mark this growth with a new season of episodes. Next week begins the three part series "Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism" about the global ascendance of China. Stay tuned!

Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp.

Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Tom Ginsburg's Judicial Review in New Democracies. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes.

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/

William G. Howell and Terry M. Moe on the Presidency

2 november 2020 | 53 min

Barbara Freese on Corporate Denial

28 oktober 2020 | 54 min

Democratic values are about more than politics. They permeate throughout society and into the economy. Barbara Freese has examined how corporate leaders have not lived up to these values. She offers examples like the tobacco industry, the use of lead in gasoline, and global warming to demonstrate how they have avoided not just accountability but any sense of responsibility for behavior with catastrophic consequences.

Barbara calls this phenomenon corporate denial and explains, “We should study corporate denial because corporations dominate our economy and shape our democracy, and for a huge proportion of Americans, corporate incentives, pressures, norms, and culture govern our work lives.”

This is really a conversation about citizenship. We work hard to compartmentalize different parts of our life. Our behavior at work is not supposed to impact our neighbors or our community, but it can and often does. Ultimately, corporate denials do not come from corporations. They come from people viewed as leaders. And they erode the trust necessary for democratic governance. But we can restore that trust through honesty. Honesty with each other and honesty with ourselves.

Barbara Freese is the author of Industrial Strength Denial: Eight Stories of Corporations Defending the Indefensible from the Slave Trade to Climate Change. She is an environmental attorney and a former Minnesota assistant attorney general. Her interest in corporate denial was sparked by cross-examining coal industry witnesses disputing the science of climate change. She lives in St. Paul.

Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp.

Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed The Concept of the Political by Carl Schmitt. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes.

Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/