Podcasts about American Political Science Review

On this episode of Virtual Sentiments, host Kristen Collins chats with Alice Siu on how deliberative polling fosters informed, respectful public dialogue. They discuss the method's use in both in-person and on AI-assisted virtual forums, its role in shaping policy, and its potential to reduce polarization. Alice highlights the importance of teaching deliberative skills in schools and how real-time, structured conversations can strengthen democracy.Dr. Alice Siu is an Associate Director at Stanford University's Deliberative Democracy Lab and a senior research fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. Read more work from Kristen Collins.Show Notes:Alice's book chapter, “Reimagining Democracy: The Role of Technology and Deliberation”Alice's paper for the American Political Science Review, “Is Deliberation an Antidote to Extreme Partisan Polarization? Reflections on ‘America in One Room'”Results of Alice's work with Meta, April 2024, April 2025, “Results of First Global Deliberative Poll® Announced by Stanford's Deliberative Democracy Lab”New York Times article, “She Is in Love With ChatGPT”S1E4, Jennifer Forestal on Designing Democratic Digital SpacesS3E1, Kris Rose on Deliberative Democracy and Meta's Community ForumsIf you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramLearn more about Academic & Student ProgramsFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatus

We've been focusing on the dynamics of democratic backsliding in the United States and beyond. In this episode of Postscript: Conversations on Politics and Political Science, Susan talks the co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium, Dr. Robert Blair about how the Consortium offers FREE resources to teachers, students, journalists, policy makers, and any interested person – including shared syllabus, readings, assignments, YouTube virtual roundtables, and policy briefs. Rob defines democratic erosion and offers critical insights on the importance of interdisciplinarity, calibrating outrage, and distinguishing between policy disputes and the erosion of democracy. He offers a clear-headed analysis of what is legal v. what breaks down democracy that is not to be missed. We conclude with thoughts on what everyone can do protect democracy. Dr. Robert Blair is Associate Professor of Political Science and International and Public Affairs at Brown University and co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium. He studies the consolidation of state authority after civil war, with an emphasis on rule of law and security institutions, as well as the causes and consequences of democratic backsliding. His book, Peacekeeping, Policing, and the Rule of Law after Civil War, was published in 2020 with Cambridge University Press and his articles appear in political science outlets such as American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, Comparative Political Studies, and International Organization but also science journals such as Science, Nature Human Behaviour, or Current Opinion in Psychology. Mentioned: Inside Higher Ed piece on grants terminated by the Trump administration, including one that funded the Democratic Erosion Consortium “An Events-Based Approach to Understanding Democratic Erosion,” P/S Political Science & Politics by Rob, Hannah Baron, Jessica Gottlieb, and Laura Paler summarizes their data collection efforts on democratic backsliding A special issue of P/S Political Science & Politics on the study of democratic backsliding An academic article on combatting misinformation from Current Opinion in Psychology by Rob, Jessica Gottlieb, Brendan Nyhan, Laura Paler, Pablo Argote, and Charlene J. Stainfield Democratic Erosion Project website and data set Chris Geidner, Law Dork: Supreme Court, Law, Politics, and More Substack Center for Systemic Peace's Polity Project coding authority characteristics of states in the world system University of Notre Dame's V-Dem Project measuring democracy Rob mentioned Brazil as a fruitful comparison for the US. He is particularly focused on how the courts can defend democratic institutions and processes – and how hard it can be to know where to draw the line between courts protecting vs. assailing democracy, and to know when the line has been crossed. Two gift articles from The New York Times here and here. Contact info for Rob: robert_blair@brown.edu Follow Rob and Democratic Erosion Consortium on social media: @robert_a_blair on X, @DemErosionDEC on X, @robertblair.bsky.social on BlueSky, @demerosiondec.bsky.social on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

We've been focusing on the dynamics of democratic backsliding in the United States and beyond. In this episode of Postscript: Conversations on Politics and Political Science, Susan talks the co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium, Dr. Robert Blair about how the Consortium offers FREE resources to teachers, students, journalists, policy makers, and any interested person – including shared syllabus, readings, assignments, YouTube virtual roundtables, and policy briefs. Rob defines democratic erosion and offers critical insights on the importance of interdisciplinarity, calibrating outrage, and distinguishing between policy disputes and the erosion of democracy. He offers a clear-headed analysis of what is legal v. what breaks down democracy that is not to be missed. We conclude with thoughts on what everyone can do protect democracy. Dr. Robert Blair is Associate Professor of Political Science and International and Public Affairs at Brown University and co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium. He studies the consolidation of state authority after civil war, with an emphasis on rule of law and security institutions, as well as the causes and consequences of democratic backsliding. His book, Peacekeeping, Policing, and the Rule of Law after Civil War, was published in 2020 with Cambridge University Press and his articles appear in political science outlets such as American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, Comparative Political Studies, and International Organization but also science journals such as Science, Nature Human Behaviour, or Current Opinion in Psychology. Mentioned: Inside Higher Ed piece on grants terminated by the Trump administration, including one that funded the Democratic Erosion Consortium “An Events-Based Approach to Understanding Democratic Erosion,” P/S Political Science & Politics by Rob, Hannah Baron, Jessica Gottlieb, and Laura Paler summarizes their data collection efforts on democratic backsliding A special issue of P/S Political Science & Politics on the study of democratic backsliding An academic article on combatting misinformation from Current Opinion in Psychology by Rob, Jessica Gottlieb, Brendan Nyhan, Laura Paler, Pablo Argote, and Charlene J. Stainfield Democratic Erosion Project website and data set Chris Geidner, Law Dork: Supreme Court, Law, Politics, and More Substack Center for Systemic Peace's Polity Project coding authority characteristics of states in the world system University of Notre Dame's V-Dem Project measuring democracy Rob mentioned Brazil as a fruitful comparison for the US. He is particularly focused on how the courts can defend democratic institutions and processes – and how hard it can be to know where to draw the line between courts protecting vs. assailing democracy, and to know when the line has been crossed. Two gift articles from The New York Times here and here. Contact info for Rob: robert_blair@brown.edu Follow Rob and Democratic Erosion Consortium on social media: @robert_a_blair on X, @DemErosionDEC on X, @robertblair.bsky.social on BlueSky, @demerosiondec.bsky.social on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

We've been focusing on the dynamics of democratic backsliding in the United States and beyond. In this episode of Postscript: Conversations on Politics and Political Science, Susan talks the co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium, Dr. Robert Blair about how the Consortium offers FREE resources to teachers, students, journalists, policy makers, and any interested person – including shared syllabus, readings, assignments, YouTube virtual roundtables, and policy briefs. Rob defines democratic erosion and offers critical insights on the importance of interdisciplinarity, calibrating outrage, and distinguishing between policy disputes and the erosion of democracy. He offers a clear-headed analysis of what is legal v. what breaks down democracy that is not to be missed. We conclude with thoughts on what everyone can do protect democracy. Dr. Robert Blair is Associate Professor of Political Science and International and Public Affairs at Brown University and co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium. He studies the consolidation of state authority after civil war, with an emphasis on rule of law and security institutions, as well as the causes and consequences of democratic backsliding. His book, Peacekeeping, Policing, and the Rule of Law after Civil War, was published in 2020 with Cambridge University Press and his articles appear in political science outlets such as American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, Comparative Political Studies, and International Organization but also science journals such as Science, Nature Human Behaviour, or Current Opinion in Psychology. Mentioned: Inside Higher Ed piece on grants terminated by the Trump administration, including one that funded the Democratic Erosion Consortium “An Events-Based Approach to Understanding Democratic Erosion,” P/S Political Science & Politics by Rob, Hannah Baron, Jessica Gottlieb, and Laura Paler summarizes their data collection efforts on democratic backsliding A special issue of P/S Political Science & Politics on the study of democratic backsliding An academic article on combatting misinformation from Current Opinion in Psychology by Rob, Jessica Gottlieb, Brendan Nyhan, Laura Paler, Pablo Argote, and Charlene J. Stainfield Democratic Erosion Project website and data set Chris Geidner, Law Dork: Supreme Court, Law, Politics, and More Substack Center for Systemic Peace's Polity Project coding authority characteristics of states in the world system University of Notre Dame's V-Dem Project measuring democracy Rob mentioned Brazil as a fruitful comparison for the US. He is particularly focused on how the courts can defend democratic institutions and processes – and how hard it can be to know where to draw the line between courts protecting vs. assailing democracy, and to know when the line has been crossed. Two gift articles from The New York Times here and here. Contact info for Rob: robert_blair@brown.edu Follow Rob and Democratic Erosion Consortium on social media: @robert_a_blair on X, @DemErosionDEC on X, @robertblair.bsky.social on BlueSky, @demerosiondec.bsky.social on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

We've been focusing on the dynamics of democratic backsliding in the United States and beyond. In this episode of Postscript: Conversations on Politics and Political Science, Susan talks the co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium, Dr. Robert Blair about how the Consortium offers FREE resources to teachers, students, journalists, policy makers, and any interested person – including shared syllabus, readings, assignments, YouTube virtual roundtables, and policy briefs. Rob defines democratic erosion and offers critical insights on the importance of interdisciplinarity, calibrating outrage, and distinguishing between policy disputes and the erosion of democracy. He offers a clear-headed analysis of what is legal v. what breaks down democracy that is not to be missed. We conclude with thoughts on what everyone can do protect democracy. Dr. Robert Blair is Associate Professor of Political Science and International and Public Affairs at Brown University and co-founder and co-director of the Democratic Erosion Consortium. He studies the consolidation of state authority after civil war, with an emphasis on rule of law and security institutions, as well as the causes and consequences of democratic backsliding. His book, Peacekeeping, Policing, and the Rule of Law after Civil War, was published in 2020 with Cambridge University Press and his articles appear in political science outlets such as American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, Comparative Political Studies, and International Organization but also science journals such as Science, Nature Human Behaviour, or Current Opinion in Psychology. Mentioned: Inside Higher Ed piece on grants terminated by the Trump administration, including one that funded the Democratic Erosion Consortium “An Events-Based Approach to Understanding Democratic Erosion,” P/S Political Science & Politics by Rob, Hannah Baron, Jessica Gottlieb, and Laura Paler summarizes their data collection efforts on democratic backsliding A special issue of P/S Political Science & Politics on the study of democratic backsliding An academic article on combatting misinformation from Current Opinion in Psychology by Rob, Jessica Gottlieb, Brendan Nyhan, Laura Paler, Pablo Argote, and Charlene J. Stainfield Democratic Erosion Project website and data set Chris Geidner, Law Dork: Supreme Court, Law, Politics, and More Substack Center for Systemic Peace's Polity Project coding authority characteristics of states in the world system University of Notre Dame's V-Dem Project measuring democracy Rob mentioned Brazil as a fruitful comparison for the US. He is particularly focused on how the courts can defend democratic institutions and processes – and how hard it can be to know where to draw the line between courts protecting vs. assailing democracy, and to know when the line has been crossed. Two gift articles from The New York Times here and here. Contact info for Rob: robert_blair@brown.edu Follow Rob and Democratic Erosion Consortium on social media: @robert_a_blair on X, @DemErosionDEC on X, @robertblair.bsky.social on BlueSky, @demerosiondec.bsky.social on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

This is a special episode that features a conversation between Sonia Bussu and Hans Asenbaum on democracy, capitalism, climate and the practices and prospects of participatory, deliberative and more-than-human democracy to transform their relationship. Can we rethink democracy beyond the liberal-democratic institutions that were created as part of the bargain for fossil-fuel-driven, Western-centric economic growth? What does and could democratic participation look like? What does it mean to include the non-human in our understanding of democracy? Sonia Bussu is Associate Professor in Public Policy at the University of Birmingham. She researches participatory democracy and in her work she uses participatory and creative methods for research and public engagement. She has led on projects on youth participation to influence mental health policy, youth employment policies, as well as coproduction of research on health and social care integration, and leadership styles within collaborative governance. She is scientific coordinator of a Horizon Europe project on participatory policymaking, INSPIRE. She is co-editor of Reclaiming Participatory Governance: Social Movements and the Reinvention of Democratic Innovation. Routledge. Hans Asenbaum is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. His research interests include radical democracy, queer and gender studies, digital politics, and participatory research methods. In 2022 he received the ECPR Rising Star Award. Hans is the author of The Politics of Becoming: Anonymity and Democracy in the Digital Age (Oxford University Press, 2023) and co-editor of Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy (with Ercan, Curato and Mendonça, Oxford University Press, 2022). His work has been published in the American Political Science Review, New Media & Society, Politics & Gender, and the International Journal of Qualitative Methods. The People, Power, Politics podcast brings you the latest insights into the factors that are shaping and re-shaping our political world. It is brought to you by the Centre for Elections, Democracy, Accountability and Representation (CEDAR) based at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Join us to better understand the factors that promote and undermine democratic government around the world and follow us on Twitter at @CEDAR_Bham! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

This is a special episode that features a conversation between Sonia Bussu and Hans Asenbaum on democracy, capitalism, climate and the practices and prospects of participatory, deliberative and more-than-human democracy to transform their relationship. Can we rethink democracy beyond the liberal-democratic institutions that were created as part of the bargain for fossil-fuel-driven, Western-centric economic growth? What does and could democratic participation look like? What does it mean to include the non-human in our understanding of democracy? Sonia Bussu is Associate Professor in Public Policy at the University of Birmingham. She researches participatory democracy and in her work she uses participatory and creative methods for research and public engagement. She has led on projects on youth participation to influence mental health policy, youth employment policies, as well as coproduction of research on health and social care integration, and leadership styles within collaborative governance. She is scientific coordinator of a Horizon Europe project on participatory policymaking, INSPIRE. She is co-editor of Reclaiming Participatory Governance: Social Movements and the Reinvention of Democratic Innovation. Routledge. Hans Asenbaum is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. His research interests include radical democracy, queer and gender studies, digital politics, and participatory research methods. In 2022 he received the ECPR Rising Star Award. Hans is the author of The Politics of Becoming: Anonymity and Democracy in the Digital Age (Oxford University Press, 2023) and co-editor of Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy (with Ercan, Curato and Mendonça, Oxford University Press, 2022). His work has been published in the American Political Science Review, New Media & Society, Politics & Gender, and the International Journal of Qualitative Methods. The People, Power, Politics podcast brings you the latest insights into the factors that are shaping and re-shaping our political world. It is brought to you by the Centre for Elections, Democracy, Accountability and Representation (CEDAR) based at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Join us to better understand the factors that promote and undermine democratic government around the world and follow us on Twitter at @CEDAR_Bham! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

This is a special episode that features a conversation between Sonia Bussu and Hans Asenbaum on democracy, capitalism, climate and the practices and prospects of participatory, deliberative and more-than-human democracy to transform their relationship. Can we rethink democracy beyond the liberal-democratic institutions that were created as part of the bargain for fossil-fuel-driven, Western-centric economic growth? What does and could democratic participation look like? What does it mean to include the non-human in our understanding of democracy? Sonia Bussu is Associate Professor in Public Policy at the University of Birmingham. She researches participatory democracy and in her work she uses participatory and creative methods for research and public engagement. She has led on projects on youth participation to influence mental health policy, youth employment policies, as well as coproduction of research on health and social care integration, and leadership styles within collaborative governance. She is scientific coordinator of a Horizon Europe project on participatory policymaking, INSPIRE. She is co-editor of Reclaiming Participatory Governance: Social Movements and the Reinvention of Democratic Innovation. Routledge. Hans Asenbaum is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. His research interests include radical democracy, queer and gender studies, digital politics, and participatory research methods. In 2022 he received the ECPR Rising Star Award. Hans is the author of The Politics of Becoming: Anonymity and Democracy in the Digital Age (Oxford University Press, 2023) and co-editor of Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy (with Ercan, Curato and Mendonça, Oxford University Press, 2022). His work has been published in the American Political Science Review, New Media & Society, Politics & Gender, and the International Journal of Qualitative Methods. The People, Power, Politics podcast brings you the latest insights into the factors that are shaping and re-shaping our political world. It is brought to you by the Centre for Elections, Democracy, Accountability and Representation (CEDAR) based at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Join us to better understand the factors that promote and undermine democratic government around the world and follow us on Twitter at @CEDAR_Bham! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/environmental-studies

About the Lecture: In this book presentation, Finkel uncovers the deep roots of the Russo-Ukrainian War. Following the rise of Russian nationalism in the nineteenth century, dominating Ukraine became the cornerstone of Russian policy. The Russian Empire, USSR and Putin's Russia had long used violence to successfully crush Ukrainian efforts to chart a separate path. Today's violence is just a more extreme version of Russia's past efforts. But unlike in the past, the people of Ukraine have overcome their deep internal divisions, and this rise of civic Ukrainian nationalism explains the successful resistance to the invasion. About the Speaker: Eugene Finkel (UW PhD in Political Science) is the Kenneth H. Keller Professor of International Affairs, Johns Hopkins SAIS. Finkel's most recent book is Intent to Destroy: Russia's Two-Hundred-Year Quest to Dominate Ukraine (Basic Books, 2024). He is also the author of Ordinary Jews: Choice and Survival during the Holocaust (Princeton University Press, 2017), and co-author of Reform and Rebellion in Weak States (Cambridge University Press, 2020) and Bread and Autocracy: Food, Politics and Security in Putin's Russia (Oxford University Press, 2023). His articles have appeared in the American Political Science Review, Journal of Politics, Comparative Political Studies, Comparative Politics, and other journals. Finkel also published articles and op-eds in The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Foreign Affairs, The Spectator and other outlets.

On this episode, we speak to Dr Pablo P. Castello, currently a Research Fellow of the Animal Law and Policy Program at Harvard Law School. Pablo is an interdisciplinary political theorist whose work has appeared in such diverse locations as the American Political Science Review, Biological Conservation, and the feminist philosophy journal Hypatia. On this episode, however, we focus on his recent article 'The fabric of zoodemocracy: a systemic approach to deliberative zoodemocracy', which was published in the Critical Review in International Social and Political Philosophy, or CRISPP. Knowing Animals is proudly sponsored by the Animal Politics book series, published by Sydney University Press.

With a Republican Congress apparently unwilling to check Trump's power, many Americans fear a looming constitutional crisis and are looking to the federal courts to ride to the rescue. But political scientist and Harvard Kennedy School Professor Maya Sen, who studies the federal judiciary, says the cavalry probably isn't coming. The Trump administration has seemingly defied judicial orders on deportations, withholding congressionally appropriated funds for federal programs, eliminating birthright citizenship, and other issues. Meanwhile, surrogates like Vice President J.D. Vance and billionaire Elon Musk have stated in social media posts that Trump is simply not bound by judicial decisions and can do pretty much whatever he pleases. Trump has even joined with some of his political supporters calling for impeachment of judges who rule against him, prompting Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to respond and call Trump's statement “inappropriate.” With the legislative branch of government sitting on the sidelines and without a credible threat of impeachment, Sen says the judiciary is no match for an authoritarian executive in terms of speed of action and political muscle—and was never intended to be. And even if it had been, structural issues with the way decisions are made and how judges are chosen give conservatives an advantage, and have resulted in a Supreme Court that is largely out of step with public opinion. Sen talks with PolicyCast host Ralph Ranalli about what can be done to restore both the separation of powers and the balance of power in the U.S. government during this unprecedented pivotal moment in American history.Maya Sen's Policy Recommendations:Pass a constitutional amendment to end lifetime appointments and limit terms for federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, to 18 years to help depoliticize the process of judicial selection.Exert public and electoral pressure on Congress and political leaders to defend the legislative branch's constitutional prerogatives and to stop ceding power to the executive branch.Episode Notes:Maya Sen is a political scientist whose interests include law, political economy, race and ethnic politics, and statistical methods. She has testified before Congress and presidential commissions on issues pertaining to the federal courts, and her research has been published in numerous academic journals including the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, and The Journal of Politics. . Her writings also include the books “The Judicial Tug of War: How Lawyers, Politicians, and Ideological Incentives Shape the American Judiciary,” and “Deep Roots: How Slavery Still Shapes Southern Politics,” which won the 2019 William H. Riker Book Award for best book published in political economy. She is currently working on a book on the relationship between the Supreme Court and public opinion. Professor Sen earned a PhD from the Department of Government at Harvard University in 2012 and holds an AM in Statistics and an AB in Economics, both from Harvard University, as well as a JD from Stanford Law School.Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Communications and Public Affairs is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an BA in political science from UCLA and a master's in journalism from Columbia University.Scheduling and logistical support for PolicyCast is provided by Lilian Wainaina. Design and graphics support is provided by Laura King and the OCPA Design Team. Web design and social media promotion support is provided by Catherine Santrock and Natalie Montaner of the OCPA Digital Team. Editorial support is provided by Nora Delaney and Robert O'Neill of the OCPA Editorial Team. 

When we think of weak democracies around the world, we often think of their inability to maintain a monopoly on violence because of challenges outside the state – like militias, rebel groups, criminal gangs, and other external, violent organizations. But sometimes it's actors deeply intertwined with the state – like political parties – who are engaging in the violence. Sometimes, the call is coming from inside the house.Our guest today, Niloufer Siddiqui, an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University at Albany - State University of New York, shares with us insights from her award-winning book Under the Gun: Political Parties and Violence in Pakistan. Exploiting subnational variation within the country, Niloufer asks why Pakistani political parties use violence to achieve their goals in some political contexts but not in others. And when they do strategically decide to use violence, when do they take care of things “in house,” having party cadres carry out violent actions and when do they outsource their “dirty work” to other groups, like gangs and militias?Examining the behavior of several political parties across multiple provinces, Niloufer explains how electoral and economic incentives, the structure of ethnic cleavages, and organizational strength factor into parties' decisions about whether to use violence – and, if so, whether to outsource it or do it themselves. We talk with Niloufer about how she gets at these dynamics by triangulating among survey experiments conducted with voters and elected politicians; about 150 interviews with party officials, journalists, civil society, and police and intelligence officers; and focus groups with party members and voters. Niloufer also tells us how, in doing this work, her own identity as a Muhajir woman gave her special access to one of the major parties she writes about, the MQM party, particularly the female members of the party. Lastly, we take a step back and talk with Niloufer about the ethical implications of her study. We ask her whether, in a fragile democracy like Pakistan, there's some risk in exposing and calling attention to the violent nature of political parties. Might doing so serve to undermine public confidence in the democratic project? Could one unintended consequence of research on democracy's shortcomings be to give actors like the military a convenient excuse to sweep in and push elected politicians aside? Works cited in this episodeBrass, Paul R. The production of Hindu-Muslim violence in contemporary India. University of Washington Press, 2011.Brubaker, Rogers, and David D. Laitin. “Ethnic and Nationalist Violence.” Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 423-452Graham, Matthew H., and Milan W. Svolik. "Democracy in America? Partisanship, polarization, and the robustness of support for democracy in the United States." American Political Science Review 114, no. 2 (2020): 392-409.Kalyvas, Stathis N. "The ontology of “political violence”: action and identity in civil wars." Perspectives on politics 1, no. 3 (2003): 475-494.Milan W. Svolik (2020), "When Polarization Trumps Civic Virtue: Partisan Conflict and the Subversion of Democracy by Incumbents", Quarterly Journal of Political Science: Vol. 15: No. 1, pp 3-31Wilkinson, Steven. Votes and violence: Electoral competition and ethnic riots in India. Cambridge University Press, 2006.

About the Talk In this episode of the Governance Podcast Associate Director Sam DeCanio, Dr. Jonny Benson, and Professor Jason Brennan discusses the relationship between knowledge, expertise and democracy.  The conversation discusses whether democracy should be understood primarily as a system involving electoral choice, or whether democracy is a type of political system incorporating additional elements such as deliberation and the rule of law. We also discuss questions regarding voter knowledge and political accountability, democracy versus rule by knowledgeable experts or the administrative state, and the types of information markets and democracy require to function effectively. The Guest Jonny Benson is a Lecturer at University of Manchester whose research examines democratic theory with a strong connection to the interdisciplinary tradition of politics, philosophy, and economics (PPE). He is particularly interested in contemporary challenges to democracy, including the rise of anti-democratic thought, the relationship to the market economy, and issues of voter knowledge, misinformation, and political polarization. Benson's first book, Intelligent Democracy: Answering the New Democratic Skepticism was published in 2024 by Oxford University Press. His articles have appeared in journals such as the American Political Science Review, Political Studies, Politics, Philosophy & Economics, Synthese, and Economics and Philosophy.   Jason Brennan (Ph.D., 2007, University of Arizona) is the Robert J. and Elizabeth Flanagan Family Professor of Strategy, Economics, Ethics, and Public Policy at the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University. He specializes in politics, philosophy, and economics. He is the editor-in-chief of Philosophy & Public Affairs, editor of Public Affairs Quarterly, and an associate editor of Social Philosophy and Policy.  He is the author of 17 books: Questioning Beneficence (Routledge, 2024), with Sam Arnold, Richard Yetter Chappell, and Ryan Davis; Democracy: A Guided Tour (Oxford University Press, 2023), Debating Democracy, with Hélène Landemore (Oxford University Press, 2021), Business Ethics for Better Behavior, with William English, John Hasnas, and Peter Jaworski (Oxford University Press, 2021), Why It's OK to Want to Be Rich (Routledge Press 2020), Good Work if You Can Get It (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020); Injustice for All: America's Dysfunctional Criminal Justice System and How to Fix It, with Christopher Surprenant (Routledge, 2019); Cracks in the Ivory Tower: The Moral Mess of Higher Education, with Phil Magness (Oxford University Press, 2019); When All Else Fails: Resistance, Violence, and State Injustice (Princeton University Press, 2018); In Defense of Openness: Global Justice as Global Freedom (Oxford University Press, 2018), with Bas van der Vossen; Against Democracy (Princeton University Press, 2016); Markets without Limits, with Peter Jaworski (Routledge Press, 2016); Compulsory Voting: For and Against, with Lisa Hill (Cambridge University Press, 2014); Why Not Capitalism? (Routledge Press, 2014); Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford University Press, 2012); The Ethics of Voting (Princeton University Press, 2011); and, with David Schmidtz, A Brief History of Liberty (Wiley-Blackwell, 2010). He is co-editor, along with David Schmidtz and Bas Van der Vossen, of the Routledge Handbook of Libertarianism (Routledge, 2017).

Send us a textIn this episode, Simon speaks to Professor Helen Kinsella and Associate Professor Giovanni Mantilla, two leading experts on the history and formation of the Geneva Conventions and IHL more generally. They discuss the negotiations leading up the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol, exploring some of the political tensions that sits behind the provisions of these key legal texts. This includes how the law treats non-state actors and non-international armed conflict, as well who gets the right to wage war. Helen Kinsella is a Professor of Political Science and Law at the University of Minnesota. Her research focuses on the theorization of gender and armed conflict and she is currently working on a book on sleep in war and another on the histories of the laws of war through the United States' wars against Native peoples.  She is the author of The Image before the Weapon (Cornell University Press, 2011), which won the 2012 Sussex International Theory Prize. Helen has a PhD in Political Science and an MA in Public Policy from the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, and a BA in Political Science and Gender Studies from Bryn Mawr College.Giovanni Mantilla is an Associate Professor in the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University, Fellow of Christ's College, and Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law. His research focusses on the operation of multilateralism, particularly practices of social pressure and pressure management in diplomacy, global governance, and international legal processes. His book Lawmaking under Pressure: International Humanitarian Law and Internal Armed Conflict (Cornell University Press, 2020) received the 2021 Francis Lieber award.Additional ResourcesHelen M Kinsella and Giovanni Mantilla, 'Contestation before Compliance: History, Politics, and Power in International Humanitarian Law' (2020) 64(3) International Studies Quarterly 649.Helen Kinsella, 'Settler Empire and the United States: Francis Lieber on the Laws of War' (2023) 117(2) American Political Science Review 629.  Vasuki Nesiah, International Conflict Feminism: Theory, Practice, Challenges (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2024)Thomas Gregory, Weaponizing Civilian Protection (Oxford University Press, 2025)Tom Dannenbaum, 'Siege Starvation: A War Crime of Societal Torture' (2021) 22(2) Chicago Journal of International Law 368.Boyd Van Dijk, Preparing for War: The Making of the Geneva Conventions (Oxford University Press, 2022) Craig Jones, The War Lawyers: The United States, Israel and Juridical Warfare (Oxford University Press, 2020)Janina Dill, Legitimate Targets? Social Construction, International Law and US Bombing (Cambridge University Press, 2014)

If access to care is so expensive, why are care workers so poorly paid? Historically, feminist discourses have looked at how ideology structures how we understand and value care work. However, in this discussion Alyssa Battistoni makes the argument that we need to update and develop these arguments, to provide a better answer to this question.  Alyssa Battistoni is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Barnard College. She is the co-author of A Planet to Win: Why We Need a Green New Deal (Verso 2019), with Kate Aronoff, Daniel Aldana Cohen, and Thea Riofrancos. Her next book is called Free Gifts: Capitalism and the Politics of Nature, and will be published with Princeton University Press in spring 2025. Her writing has appeared in publications such as New Left Review, The Nation, Dissent, n+1, Boston Review, and Jacobin. Her most recently published article, and the topic of this discussion, is titled Ideology at Work? Rethinking Reproduction, and appeared in American Political Science Review earlier this year.  SUPPORT: www.buymeacoffee.com/redmedicineSoundtrack by Mark PilkingtonTwitter: @red_medicine__www.redmedicine.substack.com/

International development projects supported by governments of wealthy countries, international financial institutions, and influential NGOs like the Gates Foundation purport to uplift poor or disadvantaged populations through political, economic, and social interventions in these communities. However, practices, policies, and discourses of development also have a darker side: they are both premised on and perpetuate the translation of social difference into deficit, ranking groups according to their perceived ‘stage' of historical development. My guest today, the political theorist Begüm Adalet, has explored how discourses and practices of development have interacted with political processes of racialization. She also examines how anti-colonial movements can resist racialized development practices by envisioning alternative means of recrafting built environments and the creation of selves. Our interview today focuses on three recent articles that she has published in academic journals: “Agricultural infrastructures: Land, race, and statecraft in Turkey,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space vol. 40, no. 6 (2022): 975-993 “Infrastructures of Decolonization: Scales of Worldmaking in the Writings of Frantz Fanon,” Political Theory vol. 50, no. 1 (2022): 5-31 “An Empire of Development: American Political Thought in Transnational Perspective,” American Political Science Review (2024) Begüm Adalet is assistant professor in the Department of Government at Cornell University. She is the author of Hotels and Highways: The construction of modernization theory in Cold War Turkey (Stanford, 2018), which I interviewed her about for the New Books Network in 2020. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

International development projects supported by governments of wealthy countries, international financial institutions, and influential NGOs like the Gates Foundation purport to uplift poor or disadvantaged populations through political, economic, and social interventions in these communities. However, practices, policies, and discourses of development also have a darker side: they are both premised on and perpetuate the translation of social difference into deficit, ranking groups according to their perceived ‘stage' of historical development. My guest today, the political theorist Begüm Adalet, has explored how discourses and practices of development have interacted with political processes of racialization. She also examines how anti-colonial movements can resist racialized development practices by envisioning alternative means of recrafting built environments and the creation of selves. Our interview today focuses on three recent articles that she has published in academic journals: “Agricultural infrastructures: Land, race, and statecraft in Turkey,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space vol. 40, no. 6 (2022): 975-993 “Infrastructures of Decolonization: Scales of Worldmaking in the Writings of Frantz Fanon,” Political Theory vol. 50, no. 1 (2022): 5-31 “An Empire of Development: American Political Thought in Transnational Perspective,” American Political Science Review (2024) Begüm Adalet is assistant professor in the Department of Government at Cornell University. She is the author of Hotels and Highways: The construction of modernization theory in Cold War Turkey (Stanford, 2018), which I interviewed her about for the New Books Network in 2020. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

International development projects supported by governments of wealthy countries, international financial institutions, and influential NGOs like the Gates Foundation purport to uplift poor or disadvantaged populations through political, economic, and social interventions in these communities. However, practices, policies, and discourses of development also have a darker side: they are both premised on and perpetuate the translation of social difference into deficit, ranking groups according to their perceived ‘stage' of historical development. My guest today, the political theorist Begüm Adalet, has explored how discourses and practices of development have interacted with political processes of racialization. She also examines how anti-colonial movements can resist racialized development practices by envisioning alternative means of recrafting built environments and the creation of selves. Our interview today focuses on three recent articles that she has published in academic journals: “Agricultural infrastructures: Land, race, and statecraft in Turkey,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space vol. 40, no. 6 (2022): 975-993 “Infrastructures of Decolonization: Scales of Worldmaking in the Writings of Frantz Fanon,” Political Theory vol. 50, no. 1 (2022): 5-31 “An Empire of Development: American Political Thought in Transnational Perspective,” American Political Science Review (2024) Begüm Adalet is assistant professor in the Department of Government at Cornell University. She is the author of Hotels and Highways: The construction of modernization theory in Cold War Turkey (Stanford, 2018), which I interviewed her about for the New Books Network in 2020. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

International development projects supported by governments of wealthy countries, international financial institutions, and influential NGOs like the Gates Foundation purport to uplift poor or disadvantaged populations through political, economic, and social interventions in these communities. However, practices, policies, and discourses of development also have a darker side: they are both premised on and perpetuate the translation of social difference into deficit, ranking groups according to their perceived ‘stage' of historical development. My guest today, the political theorist Begüm Adalet, has explored how discourses and practices of development have interacted with political processes of racialization. She also examines how anti-colonial movements can resist racialized development practices by envisioning alternative means of recrafting built environments and the creation of selves. Our interview today focuses on three recent articles that she has published in academic journals: “Agricultural infrastructures: Land, race, and statecraft in Turkey,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space vol. 40, no. 6 (2022): 975-993 “Infrastructures of Decolonization: Scales of Worldmaking in the Writings of Frantz Fanon,” Political Theory vol. 50, no. 1 (2022): 5-31 “An Empire of Development: American Political Thought in Transnational Perspective,” American Political Science Review (2024) Begüm Adalet is assistant professor in the Department of Government at Cornell University. She is the author of Hotels and Highways: The construction of modernization theory in Cold War Turkey (Stanford, 2018), which I interviewed her about for the New Books Network in 2020. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

International development projects supported by governments of wealthy countries, international financial institutions, and influential NGOs like the Gates Foundation purport to uplift poor or disadvantaged populations through political, economic, and social interventions in these communities. However, practices, policies, and discourses of development also have a darker side: they are both premised on and perpetuate the translation of social difference into deficit, ranking groups according to their perceived ‘stage' of historical development. My guest today, the political theorist Begüm Adalet, has explored how discourses and practices of development have interacted with political processes of racialization. She also examines how anti-colonial movements can resist racialized development practices by envisioning alternative means of recrafting built environments and the creation of selves. Our interview today focuses on three recent articles that she has published in academic journals: “Agricultural infrastructures: Land, race, and statecraft in Turkey,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space vol. 40, no. 6 (2022): 975-993 “Infrastructures of Decolonization: Scales of Worldmaking in the Writings of Frantz Fanon,” Political Theory vol. 50, no. 1 (2022): 5-31 “An Empire of Development: American Political Thought in Transnational Perspective,” American Political Science Review (2024) Begüm Adalet is assistant professor in the Department of Government at Cornell University. She is the author of Hotels and Highways: The construction of modernization theory in Cold War Turkey (Stanford, 2018), which I interviewed her about for the New Books Network in 2020. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

The re-election of Donald Trump in the 2024 U.S. presidential election marks a pivotal moment in American politics, raising critical questions about the future of democracy, social policy, and international relations. With a strong conservative base and renewed Republican control in Congress, Trump's second term is likely to bring significant shifts to key areas such as reproductive rights, civil liberties, and the role of federal institutions.   This election has underscored deepening divides across American society, with shifting support among white male, white female, and Latino voters signaling evolving priorities and a complex response to Trump's policies. Additionally, his victory has implications that extend beyond U.S. borders, potentially reshaping America's commitments to allies and its positions on conflicts such as Ukraine and Israel-Gaza. In today's episode, we explore both the domestic and international implications of a second Trump presidency with this week's special guests.   Joining us first is Professor Matthew Lebo, a distinguished scholar in political science from the University of Western Ontario, where he co-directs the Centre for Computational and Quantitative Social Science. Professor Lebo's expertise lies in political methodology and American politics, with a focus on national institutions, political behavior, parties, and public opinion. Professor Lebo is the author of Strategic Party Government: Why Winning Trumps Ideology (2017), and his upcoming book, A Practical Guide to Time Series, will be published by Cambridge University Press in 2025. His work has been featured in over 35 top political science journals, including the American Journal of Political Science and the Journal of Politics. Professor Lebo has also held notable roles as department chair both at Western and SUNY-Stony Brook, where he founded the Center for Behavioural Political Economy. Throughout his career, he has held prestigious appointments, including a postdoctoral fellowship at Harvard, an Academic Visitor role at Oxford, and Visiting Professor positions at the University of Toronto and, currently, McGill University.   Our second guest this week is Professor Lawrence LeDuc, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Toronto. Professor LeDuc's work has made an influential mark in the fields of Canadian and comparative political behavior, with a special focus on political parties, elections, and research methods. Among his published works are key titles such as Absent Mandate: Strategies and Choices in Canadian Elections (2019), Comparing Democracies: Elections and Voting in a Changing World (2014), and Dynasties and Interludes: Past and Present in Canadian Electoral Politics (2016). His research has also appeared in respected journals, including Electoral Studies, Party Politics, and the American Political Science Review. In recognition of his contributions, Professor LeDuc was awarded the Mildred A. Schwartz Lifetime Achievement Award in Canadian Politics by the American Political Science Association in 2015.    Produced by: Julia Brahy  

This is part two of a discussion based on a paper Chris wrote about the concept of "German Socialism" from which groups like the NSDAP, the National Bolsheviks, Conservative Revolutionaries, and Black Front draw the basis for their ideologies. Mosse, George Lachmann. The Crisis of German Ideology. 1964. Reprint, New York: Schocken, 1981. King, John. “Writing and Rewriting the First World War: Ernst Jünger and the Crisis of the Conservative Imagination, 1914-25.” St. John's College, 1999. Kedar, Asaf. “National Socialism Before Nazism: Friedrich Naumann and Theodor Fritsch, 1890-1914,” PhD diss., (University of California, Berkeley, 2010). Krebs, Gerhard. “Moeller van Den Bruck: Inventor of the ‘Third Reich.'” American Political Science Review 35, no. 6 (December 1941), 1088-1089. Stachura, Peter D. Gregor Strasser and the Rise of Nazism (RLE Nazi Germany & Holocaust). Routledge, 2014. Stern, Fritz. The Politics of Cultural Despair : A Study in the Rise of the Germanic Ideology. 1961. Reprint, Berkeley: University Of California Press, 1974. Tourlamain, Guy. Völkisch” Writers and National Socialism : A Study of Right-Wing Political Culture in Germany, 1890-1960. Oxford Et Autres: Peter Lang, 2014. Waite, Robert G L. Vanguard of Nazism : The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany 1918-1923. New York: W.W. Norton, 1969. Ward, James J. “Pipe Dreams or Revolutionary Politics? The Group of Social Revolutionary Nationalists in the Weimar Republic.” Journal of Contemporary History 15, no. 3 (July 1980): 513–32. Woods, Roger. The Conservative Revolution in the Weimar Republic. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire : New York: Macmillan Press ; St. Martin's Press, 1996, 62. Ley, Robert. 1920. “The Program of the NSDAP.” The 25 Points 1920: An Early Nazi Program, February. https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/25points.asp. Paetel, Karl O. The National Bolshevist Manifesto. 1933. Reprint, Coppell Tx: Red Flame Press, 2021. Strasser, Otto. Germany Tomorrow. Translated by Eden and Ceder Paul. 1932. Reprint, London: Jonathan Cape, 1940.Send us a textSupport the show

First of all, if you are listening to a version with bad audio, don't worry,  I reuploaded a version with good audio and you can probably just refresh your podcasting app to get the newer version. This is a discussion based on a paper Chris wrote about the concept of "German Socialism" from which groups like the NSDAP, the National Bolsheviks, Conservative Revolutionaries, and Black Front draw the basis for their ideologies. Mosse, George Lachmann. The Crisis of German Ideology. 1964. Reprint, New York: Schocken, 1981. King, John. “Writing and Rewriting the First World War: Ernst Jünger and the Crisis of the Conservative Imagination, 1914-25.” St. John's College, 1999. Kedar, Asaf. “National Socialism Before Nazism: Friedrich Naumann and Theodor Fritsch, 1890-1914,” PhD diss., (University of California, Berkeley, 2010). Krebs, Gerhard. “Moeller van Den Bruck: Inventor of the ‘Third Reich.'” American Political Science Review 35, no. 6 (December 1941), 1088-1089. Stachura, Peter D. Gregor Strasser and the Rise of Nazism (RLE Nazi Germany & Holocaust). Routledge, 2014. Stern, Fritz. The Politics of Cultural Despair : A Study in the Rise of the Germanic Ideology. 1961. Reprint, Berkeley: University Of California Press, 1974. Tourlamain, Guy. Völkisch” Writers and National Socialism : A Study of Right-Wing Political Culture in Germany, 1890-1960. Oxford Et Autres: Peter Lang, 2014. Waite, Robert G L. Vanguard of Nazism : The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany 1918-1923. New York: W.W. Norton, 1969. Ward, James J. “Pipe Dreams or Revolutionary Politics? The Group of Social Revolutionary Nationalists in the Weimar Republic.” Journal of Contemporary History 15, no. 3 (July 1980): 513–32. Woods, Roger. The Conservative Revolution in the Weimar Republic. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire : New York: Macmillan Press ; St. Martin's Press, 1996, 62. Ley, Robert. 1920. “The Program of the NSDAP.” The 25 Points 1920: An Early Nazi Program, February. https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/25points.asp. Paetel, Karl O. The National Bolshevist Manifesto. 1933. Reprint, Coppell Tx: Red Flame Press, 2021. Strasser, Otto. Germany Tomorrow. Translated by Eden and Ceder Paul. 1932. Reprint, London: Jonathan Cape, 1940.Send us a textSupport the show

What will happen on November 5 if Vice President Harris is narrowly ahead of Trump? Will it look like 2020? Or is it more likely to resemble 2000, with a knock down, drag out fight over every ballot? Liz and Andrew break it down.   Links:   Musk Is Going All In to Elect Trump https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/11/us/politics/elon-musk-donald-trump-pennsylvania.html   Press Release: Benedictine Sisters subject of fraudulent claim https://eriebenedictines.org/news-stories.html/article/2024/10/23/press-release-benedictine-sisters-subject-of-fraudulent-claims     Wand et al., The Butterfly Did It: The Aberrant Vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida, American Political Science Review (2001) https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/publications/butterfly-did-it-aberrant-vote-buchanan-palm-beach-county-florida   Bush v. Gore (Supreme Court 2000) https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2298973060085224552   Gore v. Harris (FL Supreme Court 2000) https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-supreme-court/1489353.html Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod Patreon: patreon.com/LawAndChaosPod  

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/east-asian-studies

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China.

In Coalitions of the Weak (Cambridge University Press, 2022), Victor C. Shih investigates how leaders of one-party autocracies seek to dominate the elite and achieve true dictatorship, governing without fear of internal challenge or resistance to major policy changes. Through an in-depth look of late-Mao politics informed by thousands of historical documents and data analysis, Coalitions of the Weak uncovers Mao's strategy of replacing seasoned, densely networked senior officials with either politically tainted or inexperienced officials. The book further documents how a decentralized version of this strategy led to two generations of weak leadership in the Chinese Communist Party, creating the conditions for Xi's rapid consolidation of power after 2012. Victor Shih is Professor of Political Science, Director of the 21st Century China Center, and Ho Miu Lam Chair in China and Pacific Relations at the University of California, San Diego. He is an expert on the politics of Chinese banking policies, fiscal policies, and exchange rate, as well as the elite politics of China. His first book was "Factions and Finance in China: Elite Conflict and Inflation" also with Cambridge University Press, and he edited the collection "Economic Shocks and Authoritarian Stability: Duration, Institutions and Financial Conditions," published by the University of Michigan Press. Shih also has published widely in a number of journals, including The American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, Journal of Politics, The China Quarterly, and Party Politics. In our discussion he also mentions his latest work on China's local government debt crisis, available here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center, an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and is currently a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

In democracies all around the world, criminal organizations are involved in electoral politics. Notable examples include the Sicilian mafia and Pablo Escobar's drug cartel in Colombia. We sometimes think of these criminal groups as having politicians in their pockets or as directing politicians to do their bidding at the barrel of a gun.But our guest today, Jessie Trudeau, an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, has spent years studying a different kind of relationship that can evolve between politicians and criminal gangs: candidates for office sometimes hire criminal organizations to be their brokers at election time -- essentially, paying gangs to help them corner the electoral market and mobilize votes. In an award-winning working paper and current book project, Jessie asks why it is that politicians in some parts of the world bring outlaws into their campaigns for office.We talk with Jessie about the particular qualities of certain criminal organizations that make them especially well suited to scaring up votes, like their control over territory and the relationships they've built with residents. Drawing on extensive interviews she conducted with politicians and gang members in Brazil, Jessie tells us in striking detail about the different forms that these politician-criminal collaborations can take -- from one-off deals to long-term partnerships -- and about the tactics that criminal organizations use -- how they keep competing politicians out and how they induce voters to show up and cast their ballot the "right" way.Jessie also walks us through the natural experiment that she designed to estimate the electoral bonus that a candidate gets from working with a neighborhood gang. She talks about how she built an unusual over-time dataset tracking criminal group control over each of Rio de Janeiro's 1500 favelas and how she exploited the random assignment of voters to ballot boxes to help her identify the impact of criminal gangs on election outcomes.Finally, we talk more broadly about the role of criminality in politics and its implications for policy and democratic accountability. What happens when criminal groups get involved in electoral politics not just to earn some extra cash as brokers but to get the kinds of policies they want? Why do criminals sometimes work with politicians as partners but in other places run for office themselves? And what happens to democratic accountability when criminal groups become so good at corralling votes that politicians no longer have to directly appeal to voters' hearts and minds? Works cited in this episodeBarnes, Nicholas. "Criminal politics: An integrated approach to the study of organized crime, politics, and violence." Perspectives on Politics 15, no. 4 (2017): 967-987.Magaloni, Beatriz, Edgar Franco-Vivanco, and Vanessa Melo. "Killing in the slums: Social order, criminal governance, and police violence in Rio de Janeiro." American Political Science Review 114, no. 2 (2020): 552-572.

About the Talk In this episode of the Governance Podcast, CSGS Director Mark Pennington speaks with Dr Samuel Bagg about his recent book - The Dispersal of Power: A Critical Realist Theory of Democracy, published by Oxford University Press. The book presents an in depth consideration of the problem of 'elite capture' and the possible strategies to address this.  The Guest Samuel Bagg is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at University of South Carolina, where he teaches courses in political theory. Before moving to UofSC, he taught at the University of Oxford, McGill University, and Duke University, where he received his PhD in 2017.His research aims to ground democratic theorizing in a realistic picture of the dynamics of social inequality and political power. Among other venues, it has appeared in the American Political Science Review; the American Journal of Political Science; the Journal of Politics; Perspectives on Politics; the Journal of Political Philosophy; the European Journal of Political Theory; Philosophy, Politics, and Economics; Social Philosophy and Policy; Social Theory and Practice; and Political Research Quarterly. 

In this episode, Susan Pendergrass speaks with Stephane Lavertu, Professor at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs at Ohio State University and a Senior Research Fellow at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, about the so-called "fiscal cliff" in public education funding. They discuss the idea that returning to pre-pandemic funding levels constitutes a crisis, the implications of declining student enrollment, whether maintaining or increasing current funding levels is truly necessary, and more. Stéphane Lavertu's teaching and research focus on public administration, political economy, public policy analysis and evaluation, and education policy and governance. He has a doctorate in political science from the University of Wisconsin, a master's degree in education from Stanford University, and a bachelor's degree in political science from The Ohio State University. His interdisciplinary research examines the politics of public administration and the performance of public organizations, particularly in the context of K-12 education. He publishes in public administration journals such as Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, Journal of Policy Analysis & Management and Public Administration Review; political science journals such as American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, and Journal of Politics; education journals such as Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis and AERA Open; and economics journals such as Economics of Education Review, Journal of Public Economics, and Journal of Urban Economics. Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

Action to address climate change is essential. But the effects of such action are often imbalanced: the benefits are diffuse and long-term, while the losses are often frontloaded and concentrated amongst certain communities. That imposes two kinds of challenge:- the idea that some people, such as workers in fossil fuel industries, might face higher costs than the rest of us seems unfair.- voters are rarely willing to accept short-term harms in return for future benefits that seem distant and uncertain.A solution to these problems may lie in compensating those who face heightened costs, for example by retraining workers in affected industries. But would these schemes overcome the political hurdles to implementing the needed long-term policies? In a world of deep distrust in political leaders, can voters be persuaded that so-called ‘just transition' policies really will be fair?We are joined this week by Dr Fergus Green, Lecturer in Political Theory and Public Policy here in the UCL Department of Political Science and Dr Diane Bolet, Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Political Behaviour in the Department of Government, University of Essex. Mentioned in this episode:How to Get Coal Country to Vote for Climate Policy: The Effect of a ‘Just Transition Agreement' on Spanish Election Results.   American Political Science Review.No New Fossil Fuel Projects: The Norm We Need. Science. View the article without a paywall. UCL's Department of Political Science and School of Public Policy offers a uniquely stimulating environment for the study of all fields of politics, including international relations, political theory, human rights, public policy-making and administration. The Department is recognised for its world-class research and policy impact, ranking among the top departments in the UK on both the 2021 Research Excellence Framework and the latest Guardian rankings.

Neo-colonialism concerns the actions and effects of certain remnant features and agents of the colonial era. One way in which neocolonialism can be seen is through unequal patterns of cultural goods between the Global North and Global South. Debates surrounding cultural globalization have traditionally divided proponents of free trade and cultural preservation. In this episode we are talking to two Political Scientists who's alternative account is grounded in a global application of the ideal of social equality. Citizens of privileged societies ought to regard and relate to citizens of disadvantaged societies as social equals, and patterns of cultural exchange play an important role in promoting these relationships. Historically, colonized peoples were often regarded as inferior based on perceived failures to produce cultural achievements, to the extent that unequal global cultural production and exchange persist, and the colonial pattern remains. We are delighted to be joined by Prof Alan Patten and Dr Shuk Ying Chan, who argue that the duty to relate to foreigners as equals implies that Global North countries should stop pressing for cultural trade concessions and instead favor the import of cultural goods from the Global South. Mentioned in this episode:Shuk Ying Chan and Alan Patten. (2023) What's Wrong with Neocolonialism: The Case of Unequal Trade in Cultural Goods. American Political Science Review. UCL's Department of Political Science and School of Public Policy offers a uniquely stimulating environment for the study of all fields of politics, including international relations, political theory, human rights, public policy-making and administration. The Department is recognised for its world-class research and policy impact, ranking among the top departments in the UK on both the 2021 Research Excellence Framework and the latest Guardian rankings.

It's strange days recently at Russia's Defense Ministry. Amid the replacement of the agency's head, police have brought large-scale bribery charges against at least two senior officials in the Defense Ministry, raising questions about the state of corruption in Russia's military and the Kremlin's approach to the phenomenon in wartime.  Also earlier this month, the American Political Science Review published relevant new research by political scientist David Szakonyi, an assistant professor at George Washington University and a co-founder of the Anti-Corruption Data Collective. In the article, titled “Corruption and Co-Optation in Autocracy: Evidence from Russia,” Dr. Szakonyi explores if corrupt State Duma deputies “govern differently” and tries to establish what the governing costs of such corruption might be. The methodology he uses will be familiar to The Naked Pravda's listeners who know the techniques of anti-corruption activists like the researchers at Alexey Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation. Dr. Szakonyi joins this week's podcast to discuss his findings in the context of a major “anti-corruption moment” for Russia's Armed Forces. Timestamps for this episode: (3:26) Is this a story about corrupt politicians writ large or specifically in authoritarian states? (4:55) Explaining the paper's methodology (13:09) The demographics of State Duma corruption (14:21) How the Kremlin co-opts corrupt officials and even welcomes them into politics (17:35) The State Duma as a “rubber stamp” legislature (19:53) “High politics” and “low politics” (21:32) The role of Russia's security services (23:34) Exhaustion with anti-corruption revelationsКак поддержать нашу редакцию — даже если вы в России и вам очень страшно

The Double-Helix Entanglements of Transnational Advocacy: Moral Conservative Resistance to SOGI Rights in Europe Phillip M. Ayoub is a professor in the Department of Political Science at University College London and Editor of the European Journal of Politics and Gender. He is the author of three books, including When States Come Out: Europe's Sexual Minorities and the Politics of Visibility (Cambridge University Press, 2016), and his articles have appeared in the American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, the European Journal of International Relations, the European Journal of Political Research, Mobilization, the European Political Science Review, among others.

David Broockman is an associate professor of political science at UC Berkeley. He is the co-author of a study published in the American Political Science Review last month titled “How Experiments Help Campaigns Persuade Voters: Evidence from a Large Archive of Campaigns' Own Experiments.”  In our conversation, we discuss the research and learn what campaigners should do in light of the findings. 

In this episode, Xavier Bonilla has a dialogue with Robert Trager about international governance of AI systems. They discuss why questions of AI are important, defining intelligence and machine learning, and provide an overview of the current landscape of AI systems. They talked about the ethics and governance for AI systems, how other governance models have been used, controlling the creativity of AI, civilian AI, military AI, and enforcement rules with military AI. They also mention the alignment problem, how to discuss AI in public life, and many more topics. Robert Trager is Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, and International Governance Lead at the Centre for the Governance of AI. He is a recognized expert in the international governance of emerging technologies, diplomatic practice, and institutional design. His research also focuses on economic models of technology races, and regulation and industry cooperation for the public benefit in safety-critical industries. He has written two books and numerous articles in leading social science journals, including the American Political Science Review, International Organization, International Security, Foreign Affairs and many others. Website: https://robertftrager.com/ Get full access to Converging Dialogues at convergingdialogues.substack.com/subscribe

How do the space-colony visions of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos meaningfully differ? What does a company like Space-X have in common with the old imperial company-states, like the British East India Company? And why are billionaire bros obsessed with “political exit” projects like seasteading and galactic escapism? We tackle all that and more with Alina Utrata, a scholar whose new article in American Political Science Review called, “Engineering Territory: Space and Colonies in Silicon Valley” is a banger.Morris Cohen, Property and SovereigntyRobert Nichols, Theft is PropertyAlina's PodcastSubscribe to Alina's NewsletterSubscribe to the Un-Diplomatic Newsletter: https://www.un-diplomatic.com

On this episode of the Anti-Dystopians, your usual host is in the hot seat! Guest host Benjamin Tan, PhD Candidate at Cambridge, asks Alina Utrata about her recent publication in the American Political Science Review about Silicon Valley's outer space colonization projects. They discuss what Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are up to in space, why terrestrial and celestial colonization are not as different as they may seem, what the history of the British East India Company can tell us about SpaceX and Blue Origin, and why indigenous conceptions of property can problematize sovereignty and territoriality and the way we think about political power and rule today.For a complete reading list from the episode, check out the Anti-Dystopians substack at bit.ly/3kuGM5X.You can follow Alina Utrata on Twitter @alinautrata and the Anti-Dystopians podcast @AntiDystopians.All episodes of the Anti-Dystopians are hosted and produced by Alina Utrata and are freely available to all listeners. To support the production of the show, subscribe to the newsletter at bit.ly/3kuGM5X.Nowhere Land by Kevin MacLeodLink: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/4148-nowhere-landLicense: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Meghan is joined by Valerie Hudson, speaker at our upcoming Awake and Ascend conference, to discuss the vital role of women, and identifying our value in a religious setting, such as the Church. Topics Include: - LDS Doctrine is Pro-Women- Motherhood as an education in free agency and discipleship- The treatment of women and national security- The ultimate female role model-Identifying the priestesshood, female keys, and ordinancesDr. Valerie Hudson, University Distinguished Professor, joined the faculty of the Bush School in 2012 as the holder of the George H. W. Bush Chair. An expert on international security and foreign policy analysis as well as gender and security, she received her PhD in political science at The Ohio State University and comes to Texas A&M University from a senior faculty position at Brigham Young University. Hudson directs the Bush School's Program on Women, Peace, and Security.In 2009, Foreign Policy named her one of the top 100 Most Influential Global Thinkers. Her coauthored book Bare Branches: Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population, and the research it presents, received major attention from the media with coverage in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Financial Times, Washington Post, BBC, CNN, and numerous other outlets. The book also received two national book awards. Another coauthored book, Sex and World Peace, published by Columbia University Press, was named by Gloria Steinem as one of the top three books on her reading list. Another award-winning book, with Patricia Leidl, is The Hillary Doctrine: Sex and American Foreign Policy, published in June 2015. Her newest coauthored book is The First Political Order: How Sex Shapes Governance and National Security Worldwide (Columbia University Press, 2020). She was also named a Distinguished Scholar of Foreign Policy Analysis as well as a Distinguished Scholar of Political Demography and Geography by the International Studies Association.Hudson served as vice president of the International Studies Association for 2011-2012. She is a founding editorial board member of Foreign Policy Analysis, and also serves or has served on the editorial boards of The American Political Science Review, Politics and Gender, the American Journal of Political Science, and International Studies Review. More information can be found on her professional website vmrhudson.org. Register NOW for Awake and Ascend: The Mountain of the Lord, our virtual conference being held on November 3-4. The purpose of this event is to explore ancient and modern temple types and their patterns, to more deeply understand the significance of temple worship, and the application of temple living in our mortal journeys. Also, we have an EXCITING ANNOUNCEMENT, which we will share during the Saturday session. You won't want to miss it!

John Stuart Mill's On Liberty has been a consistent and prominent reference point in the ongoing debates about free speech. In this episode we discuss an elegant and powerful critique of Mill by the twentieth century political theorist Willmoore Kendall. His essay “The ‘Open Society' and Its Fallacies” was published in the American Political Science Review in December of 1960. Our conversation covers various aspects of Kendall's critique. Kendall claims that Mill's argument for freedom rests on a false conception of the nature of society and human nature itself. We explore Kendall's understanding of Mill's thoroughgoing radicalism. “Mill,” Kendall writes, “is in full rebellion against both religion and philosophy, and so in full rebellion also against the traditional society that embodies them.” We also take up the phenomenon of what Kendall calls the “dispersal of opinion.” He contends that any society which guides itself according to Mill's prescriptions will “descend ineluctably into ever deepening differences of opinion, into progressive breakdown of those common premises upon which alone a society can its affairs by discussion.”   Our guest is James Stoner. Professor Stoner is the Hermann Moyse, Jr., Professor and Director of the Eric Voegelin Institute in the Department of Political Science at Louisiana State University, where he has taught since 1988.  He is the author of Common-Law Liberty (Kansas, 2003) and Common Law and Liberal Theory (Kansas, 1992), and co-editor of Free Speech and Intellectual Diversity in Higher Education with Paul Carrese and Carol McNamara—just published in September of 2023. He also contributed a chapter to this volume called “Was John Stuart Mill Right About Free Speech?” which will be of interest to anyone who listens to our conversation here.

Today on Scope Conditions, what's the secret to successful peacekeeping?We often think of civil conflict as being driven by organized, armed groups – like rebel militias and state armies. But as our guest today reminds us, a leading cause of conflict around the world is communal violence – fights that break out between civilians over land, cattle, water, and other scarce resources.  When the United Nations sends peacekeepers in to manage a conflict, one of their most important jobs is defusing tensions among neighbors – preventing local disputes from spiraling into widespread violence and derailing a larger peace process. Dr. William Nomikos is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at UC Santa Barbara. In his forthcoming book, Local Peace, International Builders: How the UN Builds Peace from the Bottom Up, Will asks why peacekeepers sometimes manage, but other times fail, to keep a lid on communal violence. As he explains to us, the key to successful peacekeeping is being perceived by local populations as an impartial mediator among contending groups. But the thing is, a reputation for impartiality isn't something that a peacekeeping force can manufacture overnight. Whether or not peacekeepers are seen as unbiased in a communal dispute is often shaped by experiences that long predate the contemporary conflict, such as the legacies of colonialism. It turns out that deployments by former colonizers – like French peacekeepers sent to Mali – have a pretty hard time tamping down local conflicts.Will walks us through the micro-level logic of his theory of impartial peacekeeping, grounded in the psychology of group conflict. We then discuss his multi-pronged empirical strategy for testing the theory – using a novel, highly granular dataset on peacekeeping deployments; in-depth interviews with communal leaders; and lab-in-the-field experiments in Mali. And we talk about the policy implications of his findings: is the UN uniquely capable of generating perceptions of fairness and managing communal violence, or can NGOs or regional bodies also get the job done? How do revelations of abusive and exploitative behavior by some UN peacekeepers complicate the impartiality picture? And if the presence of neutral arbiters is crucial for keeping a lid on violence, then what's the peacekeeper's exit strategy?Works cited in this episode: Baldwin, Kate. The paradox of traditional chiefs in democratic Africa. Cambridge University Press, 2016.Blair, Robert A., Sabrina M. Karim, and Benjamin S. Morse. "Establishing the rule of law in weak and war-torn states: Evidence from a field experiment with the Liberian National Police." American Political Science Review 113, no. 3 (2019): 641-657.Hunnicutt, Patrick and William G. Nomikos. 2020. “Nationality, Gender, and Deployments at the Local Level: Introducing the RADPKO Dataset.” International Peacekeeping 27(4):645–672Russell, Kevin, and Nicholas Sambanis. "Stopping the violence but blocking the peace: dilemmas of foreign-imposed nation building after ethnic war." International Organization 76, no. 1 (2022): 126-163.

Foreign influences on elections are widespread. Although foreign interventions around elections differ markedly-in terms of when and why they occur, and whether they are even legal-they all have enormous potential to influence citizens in the countries where elections are held. Monitors and Meddlers: How Foreign Actors Influence Local Trust in Elections (Cambridge UP, 2022) explains how and why outside interventions influence local trust in elections, a critical factor for democracy and stability. Whether foreign actors enhance or diminish electoral trust depends on who is intervening, what political party citizens support, and where the election takes place. The book draws on diverse evidence, including new surveys conducted around elections with varying levels of democracy in Georgia, Tunisia, and the United States. Its insights about public opinion shed light on why leaders sometimes invite foreign influences on elections and why the candidates that win elections do not do more to respond to credible evidence of foreign meddling. Sarah Bush is an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania. Her research examines how international actors try to aid democracy, promote women's representation, and influence elections globally, as well as the politics of climate change. She is the author of The Taming of Democracy Assistance: Why Democracy Promotion Does Not Confront Dictators (Cambridge University Press, 2015). Lauren Prather is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego in the School of Global Policy and Strategy. Her work focuses on political behavior in international relations, democracy promotion and democratization, foreign aid and migration, and experimental methods. She is the author of several publications appearing in such journals as American Political Science Review and International Organization. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

To lead into the next season of Enduring Interest, we're re-releasing our first two seasons, covering totalitarianism and ideology and liberal education.  We'll be back on September 8 with a new season covering free speech and censorship. In this episode Rita Koganzon and I discuss two essays by the philosopher Hannah Arendt: “Crisis in Education” and “Reflections on Little Rock.” The former was first published in Partisan Review in 1958 and the latter in Dissent in 1959. Rita gives an account of the context for the two essays and how they are related. We discuss Arendt's critique of a number of progressive educational reforms including learning as doing and emancipating children from the authority of adults. Rita explains Arendt's concept of natality and her understanding of the relationship between knowledge and authority. We discuss Arendt's reasons for pessimism as far as school integration as an educational enterprise and why the Little Rock essay generated such controversy. We also discuss the relevance of Arendt's reflections on education to our own time. Rita Koganzon is the associate director of the Program on Constitutionalism and Democracy and Assistant Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia. Her research focuses on the themes of education, childhood, authority, and the family in historical and contemporary political thought. Her first book, Liberal States, Authoritarian Families: Childhood and Education in Early Modern Thought (Oxford, 2021) examines the justifications for authority over children from Jean Bodin to Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Her research and essays have been published in the American Political Science Review and the Review of Politics, as well as in the Hedgehog Review, National Affairs, The Point, and the Chronicle of Higher Education, among others. She received her PhD in Government from Harvard University, and her BA in History from the University of Chicago. Check out Rita's essay “A Tale of Two Educational Traditions.” “Crisis in Education” can be found in Between Past and Future and “Reflections on Little Rock” in Responsibility and Judgment.

Prighozhin's calculated outbursts, the incursion into Belgorod, the fall and then encirclement of Bakhmut by Ukraine… everything seems to be happening all at once. What is going on – and could this war be over much sooner than most military experts predict? Here's a quote from the latest video dropped by Prighozhin, and he says a lot in it that Ukrainians could actually concur with: “We came here in vulgarity and trampled all over their territory looking for Nazis. While we were searching for Nazis, we nailed anyone else we could find. We approached Kyiv, and then, as is said in Russian, shat ourselves and retreated. Came upon Kherson, shat ourselves and withdrew… We conducted the Special Military Operation to de-nazify and demilitarise Ukraine, but instead of denazification we turned Ukraine into a country that the whole world knows about.” ---------- SPEAKER: Graeme Robertson is a Professor of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Director of the Centre for Slavic, Eurasian, and East European Studies. His work focuses on political protest and regime support in authoritarian regimes. As well as Putin v. The People, Graeme is also the author of Revolution and Reform in Ukraine, and The Politics of Protest in Hybrid Regimes: Managing Dissent in Post-Communist Russia, published by Cambridge University Press. He has published articles in many academic journals including the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, The Journal of Politics, and the British Journal of Political Science, as well as contributing regularly to the media on Russia and Ukraine. ---------- BOOKS: Putin v the People: The Perilous Politics of a Divided Russia. by Graeme Robertson and Samuel Greene (2023) Moscow in Movement: Power & Opposition in Putin's Russia Samuel Greene (2014) The Politics of Protest in Hybrid Regimes: Managing Dissent in Post-Communist Russia by Graeme Robertson (2010) ---------- LINKS https://www.linkedin.com/in/samuel-greene-27aab56/ https://twitter.com/samagreene https://politicalscience.unc.edu/staff/graeme-robertson/ https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/samuel-greene ----------

This week on Babel, Jon Alterman speaks with Prof. Killian Clarke of Georgetown's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service about his forthcoming book tentatively entitled The Return of Tyranny: How Counterrevolutions Emerge and Succeed. They talk about the counterrevolution in Egypt, the complex relationship between the military, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the public, and lessons learned from counterrevolutions around the world. Later, Jon continues the conversation with Natasha Hall and Lubna Yousef, debating similarities between Egypt and Tunisia, and how the region views U.S. influence post 2011. Killian Clarke, “Revolutionary Violence and Counterrevolution,” American Political Science Review, December 19, 2022.  Killian Clarke, "This Is How to Stop the Coup in Sudan," The New York Times. 29 October 2021. Jon Alterman, "Egypt's Economic Challenge," The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune, April 2023. Transcript, "Egypt's Counterrevolution and the Return to Tyranny," CSIS, May 2, 2023.

Join Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P. of Aquinas 101, Godsplaining, and Pints with Aquinas for an off-campus conversation with Prof. Phillip Muñoz about his new book, "Religious Liberty and the American Founding." Religious Liberty and the American Founding w/ Fr. Gregory Pine (Off-Campus Conversations) For more information on upcoming events, please visit our website at www.thomisticinstitute.org. About the Speaker: Vincent Phillip Muñoz is Tocqueville Associate Professor of Political Science and Concurrent Associate Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame. He is the Founding Director of ND's Center for Citizenship & Constitutional Government. Under his leadership the programs have raised over $16,500,000 in grants, gifts, and pledges. Dr. Muñoz writes and teaches across the fields of constitutional law, American politics, and political philosophy with a focus on religious liberty and the American Founding. He won a National Endowment for the Humanities fellowship to support his forthcoming book, Religious Liberty and the American Founding: Natural Rights and the Original Meanings of the First Amendment Religion Clauses, which will be published by the University of Chicago Press in the summer of 2022. Articles related the project have appeared in American Political Science Review, The Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Notre Dame Law Review, American Political Thought, and the University of Pennsylvania's Journal of Constitutional Law. His first book, God and the Founders: Madison, Washington, and Jefferson (Cambridge University Press, 2009) won the Hubert Morken Award from the American Political Science Association for the best publication on religion and politics in 2009 and 2010. His First Amendment church-state case reader, Religious Liberty and the American Supreme Court: The Essential Cases and Documents (Rowman & Littlefield) was first published in 2013 (revised edition, 2015) and is being used at Notre Dame and other leading universities. In 2019, he joined the editorial team of American Constitutional Law (11th edition, Routledge, 2020), the leading constitutional law casebooks designed for undergraduate instruction. His scholarship has been cited numerous times in church-state Supreme Court opinions, most recently by Justice Alito in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (2021) and by both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas in Espinoza v. Montana (2020). An award-winning teacher and a popular lecturer, Dr. Muñoz has spoken at nearly 75 colleges and universities in the past several years. He received his B.A. at Claremont McKenna College, his M.A. at Boston College, and his Ph.D. at Claremont Graduate School.