Podcasts about American Political Science Review

Today on the podcast, why are more unequal neighborhoods sometimes better at promoting the collective good?A world of high inequality is, in many ways, a world in which the fortunes of the rich are detached from the welfare of the poor. It's a world in which the affluent are less reliant on public goods for securing their own safety and wellbeing. Those with money can purchase essential services – even things like security, sewage systems, or street lights – on private markets – rather than turning to the government. A highly unequal society is thus one in which the affluent may have little reason to support public infrastructure and services – or the high taxes required to finance them. It's a society, in short, that's going to have a hard time providing widespread public goods. The result can be a vicious circle – deteriorating living conditions among the poorest and growing comfort and prosperity among the better-off.But our guest today argues that things don't always have to work this way – that the consequences of inequality depend not only on who has what, but also on where. Dr. Alice Xu is an Assistant Professor at the University of Pennsylvania's School of Social Policy and Practice and Department of Political Science. In her article published in the American Political Science Review – and a book project currently in progress – Alice argues that whether or not the affluent support the provision of public goods depends on patterns of residential segregation and integration. As Alice argues, when the middle and upper classes live in close proximity to the poor, their fortunes are more closely intertwined than they are in cities that are highly segregated by social class. In an integrated city, when the poor experience unsafe streets or disease-ridden sewage runoff, so too do their better-off neighbors. Alice talks to us about the in-depth, mixed method study she carried out in several cities in Brazil – one of the world's most unequal countries. We dig into how class-integrated neighborhoods sometimes escape inequality's vicious circle – as the middle and upper classes demand that the state invest more generously in urban infrastructure and services for everyone. This is work that doesn't just shed new light on the political economy of inequality but also holds important lessons for the planning and governance of the world's cities – in particular, showing just what is at stake in avoiding high levels of segregation by social class.We hope you enjoy this conversation. To stay informed about future episodes, follow us on Bluesky @scopeconditions and check out our website, scopeconditionspodcast.com, where you can also find references to all the academic works we discuss. And if you like the show, please rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.Now, here's our conversation with Alice Xu.Works cited in this episodeAllport, Gordon Willard, Kenneth Clark, and Thomas F. Pettigrew. The nature of prejudice. Vol. 2. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1954.Boustan, Leah Platt. “Was postwar suburbanization ‘white flight'? Evidence from the black migration.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 125, no. 1 (2010): 417–443.Derenoncourt, Ellora. “Can you move to opportunity? Evidence from the Great Migration.” American Economic Review 112, no. 2 (2022): 369–408.Habyarimana, James, Macartan Humphreys, Daniel N. Posner, and Jeremy M. Weinstein. Coethnicity: Diversity and the dilemmas of collective action. Russell Sage Foundation, 2009.McGhee, Heather. The sum of us: What racism costs everyone and how we can prosper together. One World, 2022.Milanovic, Branko. Worlds apart: Measuring international and global inequality. Princeton University Press, 20

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! 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 an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/film

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening!

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/academic-life

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/communications

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! 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

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/popular-culture

On today's show, host Esty Dinur is in conversation with Killian Clarke about his new book, Return of Tyranny: Why Counterrevolutions Emerge and Succeed. He researches moments of democratic liberation brought about by mass struggle and why some succeed and others fail. Though he did not write about the US, he's seen his research become surprising and tragically poignant in the second Trump presidency. Clarke says that democratic backsliding like we're seeing in the US, has happened in other democracies around the world. But elected leaders who systematically dismantle institutions of democracy and then install an authoritarian regime is far more common in young democracies than in places like the US. It's shocking how quickly Trump and his team are succeeding. There are resonances between tyrants everywhere in how they cement their rule and gain popularity. They also discuss comparisons between Trump and Hitler's rise to power, political polarization in the US, Clarke's research on Egypt, and the vulnerability of other unarmed revolutions. Clarke says that there are downsides to the prevalence of technology in today's social movements and says that grassroots organizing is needed to sustain a movement. He recommends Zeynep Tufekci's book, Twitter and Tear Gas and says it's possible to pressure the Democratic Party to stand for something, like was done during the Civil Rights Movement.  Killian Clarke is an Assistant Professor in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, affiliated with the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies. His research examines revolution, protest, democratization, and authoritarianism with a regional focus on the Middle East. He is the author of Return of Tyranny: Why Counterrevolutions Emerge and Succeed (Cambridge University Press, 2025), as well as peer-reviewed articles in the American Political Science Review, Annual Review of Political Science, British Journal of Political Science, and World Politics. Featured image of the cover of Return of Tyranny: Why Counterrevolutions Emerge and Succeed, available from Cambridge University Press. Did you enjoy this story? Your funding makes great, local journalism like this possible. Donate hereThe post How to Make Tyrants and Cement Power appeared first on WORT-FM 89.9.

I'm very excited to have on Rory Truex as my guest for today's episode. Rory is Associate Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University. His research focuses on Chinese politics and authoritarian systems, and his work has been published in the American Political Science Review, British Journal of Political Science, The China Quarterly and many more. He has been featured in The Atlantic, The Washington Post, The Hill, South China Morning Post, and The New York Times. He is also the host of The Civic Forum Podcast, a weekly public speaker series on democracy featuring leading scholars and practitioners.We talk the decline in funding for China related research grants in the US, the role of the government and individual institutions in creating a productive and protective relationship with China, and the golden age of China studies (and if it's possible to ever get back there).Read the working paper hereCheck out The Civic Forum hereBuy book club books hereBuy me a coffeeLatest Substack postSupport the showSign up for Buzzsprout to launch your podcasting journey: https://www.buzzsprout.com/?referrer_id=162442Subscribe to the Sinobabble Newsletter: https://sinobabble.substack.com/Support Sinobabble on Buy me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/Sinobabblepod

In this episode, we discuss the problems associated with vague concepts in psychological science. We talk about the jingle-jangle fallacy, the trade-off between broad concepts and more precise concepts, if we should generate databases of conceptual definitions, and how the reward structures can get in the way of specifying concepts clearly.   Aikins, H. A. (1902). The principles of logic. H. Holt and Company. https://www.loc.gov/resource/gdcmassbookdig.principlesoflogi00aiki/   Chalmers, D. J. (2025). What is conceptual engineering and what should it be? Inquiry, 68(9), 2902–2919. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2020.1817141    Gerring, J. (1999). What Makes a Concept Good? A Criterial Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Sciences. Polity, 31(3), 357–393. https://doi.org/10.2307/3235246    Hirsch, P. M., & Levin, D. Z. (1999). Umbrella Advocates Versus Validity Police: A Life-Cycle Model. Organization Science, 10(2), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.2.199    Sartori, G. (1970). Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics. The American Political Science Review, 64(4), 1033–1053. https://doi.org/10.2307/1958356    Thorndike, E. L. (Edward L. (with University of California Libraries). (1904). An introduction to the theory of mental and social measurements. New York : Science Press. http://archive.org/details/theoryofmentalso00thor   Truman Lee Kelley, (1927). Interpretation of education measurements. World book company. http://archive.org/details/bwb_P9-AQI-186   APA Dictionary of Psychology: https://dictionary.apa.org/ 

About the Lecture: The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has reinvigorated debates about the causes of war. The question of why Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale war in 2022 does not seem to be answered by many usual explanations, e.g. material interests or threats to international security. Herrera argues that Russia's imperial ambitions and sense of Russian national identity heavily shaped Russian President Vladimir Putin's decision to launch the full-scale invasion. Hence, one of the challenges for International Relations theory is the need to update and improve our understanding of the role of identity in conflict and political violence. In this talk, Herrera maps out a theoretical framework for identity and conflict, and then discusses relevant aspects of identity in both Ukraine and Russia, with an emphasis on how identities might have contributed to the war and been changed as a consequence. About the Speaker: Yoshiko M. Herrera is Professor of Political Science at University of Wisconsin-Madison. Her research focuses on Russian and Eurasian politics, identity, and political economy. Herrera teaches courses on comparative politics, social identities and diversity, and a new course on the Russian war on Ukraine. She is also a former director of the Center for Russia, East Europe and Central Asia at UW-Madison. She is the author of two books and an influential co-edited volume on Measuring Identity. Her most recent co-authored article is “Don't Look Back in Anger: Cooperation Despite Conflicting Historical Narratives” published in the "American Political Science Review."

Timothy Minella (Goldwaterinstitue.org) is a Senior Constitutionalism Fellow, Van Sittert Center for Constitutional Advocacy at the Goldwater Institute. He shares what he's unearthed in the peer review controversy at the American Political Science Review.

Matt analyzes the ideological takeover of the American Political Science Review, how they're finally admitting that Covid shots have proven fatal to some children, Democrats working overtime on gerrymandering, and how Tim Walz might actually be held accountable. Might. Plus, the 12 Days of Lib Christmas... partially in song!

In this episode, Dr. Kevin Esterling, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at UC Riverside, talks with the UC Riverside School of Public Policy about using technology to make public meetings more inclusive and effective. This is the seventh episode in our 11-part series, Technology vs. Government, featuring former California State Assemblymember Lloyd Levine.About Dr. Kevin Esterling:Kevin Esterling is Professor of Public Policy and Political Science, chair of political science, and the Director of the Laboratory for Technology, Communication and Democracy (TeCD-Lab) at the University of California, Riverside, and affiliate of the UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC). He is the past interim dean and associate dean of the UCR Graduate Division. His research focuses on technology for communication in democratic politics, and in particular the use of artificial intelligence and large language models for understanding and improving the quality of democratic communication in online spaces. His methodological interests are in artificial intelligence, large language models, Bayesian statistics, machine learning, experimental design, and science ethics and validity. His books have been published on Cambridge University Press and the University of Michigan Press, and his journal articles have appeared in such journals as Science, Nature, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature Human Behavior, the American Political Science Review, Political Analysis, the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, and the Journal of Politics. His work has been funded by the National Science Foundation, The Democracy Fund, the MacArthur Foundation, and the Institute of Education Sciences. Esterling was previously a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in Health Policy Research at the University of California, Berkeley and a postdoctoral research fellow at the A. Alfred Taubman Center for Public Policy and American Institutions at Brown University. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Chicago in 1999.Interviewer:Lloyd Levine (Former California State Assemblymember, UCR School of Public Policy Senior Policy Fellow)Music by: Vir SinhaCommercial Links:https://spp.ucr.edu/ba-mpphttps://spp.ucr.edu/mppThis is a production of the UCR School of Public Policy: https://spp.ucr.eduSubscribe to this podcast so you do not miss an episode. Learn more about the series and other episodes at https://spp.ucr.edu/podcast.

In this episode, Aurelian Craiutu, professor of political science at Indiana University, explores the role of moderation in contemporary politics. His research focuses on French political and social thought and comparative political theory, and he has written and edited more than a dozen books. His work has appeared in leading academic journals including American Political Science Review, Perspectives on Politics, and Political Theory. The conversation centers on his 2023 book Why Not Moderation?: Letters to Young Radicals, which makes the case that moderation is not a passive stance but a powerful and, at times, radical force in turbulent political moments.

Political scientists have long argued that legislators believe the public is more conservative than it really is—potentially shaping policies that don't align with what voters actually want. But what if that story is incomplete?In this episode, we talk with University of Chicago political scientist Adam Zelizer, who challenges the conventional wisdom. His new research suggests that politicians may not be systematically biased to the right, but rather exhibit something he calls “midpoint bias”.We unpack why this matters: How do politicians perceive their constituents? Are surveys of public opinion misleading policymakers—or are policymakers just inattentive? And what does this all reveal about the messy relationship between democracy, representation, and what voters actually want?

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao ruled through violence, fear, and ideology. But in recent decades a new breed of media-savvy strongmen has been redesigning authoritarian rule for a more sophisticated, globally connected world. In place of overt, mass repression, rulers such as Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Viktor Orbán control their citizens by distorting information and simulating democratic procedures. Like spin doctors in democracies, they spin the news to engineer support. Uncovering this new brand of authoritarianism, Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman explain the rise of such “spin dictators,” describing how they emerge and operate, the new threats they pose, and how democracies should respond. Spin Dictators traces how leaders such as Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew and Peru's Alberto Fujimori pioneered less violent, more covert, and more effective methods of monopolizing power. They cultivated an image of competence, concealed censorship, and used democratic institutions to undermine democracy, all while increasing international engagement for financial and reputational benefits. The book reveals why most of today's authoritarians are spin dictators—and how they differ from the remaining “fear dictators” such as Kim Jong-un and Bashar al-Assad. Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century (Princeton UP, 2022) is aimed at a general audience, synthesizing a vast amount of qualitative and quantitative research by the authors and many other scholars. The book is highly readable, with a great mix of anecdotes and examples along with plain-English explanations of academic research findings. However, it also provides an excellent overview of contemporary global authoritarianism for academics. Almost every claim in the book has an endnote reference to the original research for those who want to follow up. The endnotes mean that despite its moderately intimidating 340-page heft, the main text is a very approachable 219 pages. Daniel Treisman is a professor of political science at the University of California, Los Angeles and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. His research focuses on Russian politics and economics as well as comparative political economy, including in particular the analysis of democratization, the politics of authoritarian states, political decentralization, and corruption. In 2021-22, he was a visiting fellow at Stanford University's Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and he was recently named a 2022 Andrew Carnegie Fellow. A graduate of Oxford University (B.A. Hons.) and Harvard University (Ph.D. 1995), he has published five books and numerous articles in leading political science and economics journals including The American Political Science Review and The American Economic Review, as well as in public affairs journals such as Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy. He has also served as a consultant for the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and USAID. In Russia, he has been a member of the International Advisory Committee of the Higher School of Economics and a member of the Jury of the National Prize in Applied Economics Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads a new Master's program in Applied Economics focused on the digital economy. His research focuses on the political economy 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/world-affairs

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao ruled through violence, fear, and ideology. But in recent decades a new breed of media-savvy strongmen has been redesigning authoritarian rule for a more sophisticated, globally connected world. In place of overt, mass repression, rulers such as Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Viktor Orbán control their citizens by distorting information and simulating democratic procedures. Like spin doctors in democracies, they spin the news to engineer support. Uncovering this new brand of authoritarianism, Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman explain the rise of such “spin dictators,” describing how they emerge and operate, the new threats they pose, and how democracies should respond. Spin Dictators traces how leaders such as Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew and Peru's Alberto Fujimori pioneered less violent, more covert, and more effective methods of monopolizing power. They cultivated an image of competence, concealed censorship, and used democratic institutions to undermine democracy, all while increasing international engagement for financial and reputational benefits. The book reveals why most of today's authoritarians are spin dictators—and how they differ from the remaining “fear dictators” such as Kim Jong-un and Bashar al-Assad. Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century (Princeton UP, 2022) is aimed at a general audience, synthesizing a vast amount of qualitative and quantitative research by the authors and many other scholars. The book is highly readable, with a great mix of anecdotes and examples along with plain-English explanations of academic research findings. However, it also provides an excellent overview of contemporary global authoritarianism for academics. Almost every claim in the book has an endnote reference to the original research for those who want to follow up. The endnotes mean that despite its moderately intimidating 340-page heft, the main text is a very approachable 219 pages. Daniel Treisman is a professor of political science at the University of California, Los Angeles and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. His research focuses on Russian politics and economics as well as comparative political economy, including in particular the analysis of democratization, the politics of authoritarian states, political decentralization, and corruption. In 2021-22, he was a visiting fellow at Stanford University's Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and he was recently named a 2022 Andrew Carnegie Fellow. A graduate of Oxford University (B.A. Hons.) and Harvard University (Ph.D. 1995), he has published five books and numerous articles in leading political science and economics journals including The American Political Science Review and The American Economic Review, as well as in public affairs journals such as Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy. He has also served as a consultant for the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and USAID. In Russia, he has been a member of the International Advisory Committee of the Higher School of Economics and a member of the Jury of the National Prize in Applied Economics Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads a new Master's program in Applied Economics focused on the digital economy. His research focuses on the political economy 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/russian-studies

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao ruled through violence, fear, and ideology. But in recent decades a new breed of media-savvy strongmen has been redesigning authoritarian rule for a more sophisticated, globally connected world. In place of overt, mass repression, rulers such as Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Viktor Orbán control their citizens by distorting information and simulating democratic procedures. Like spin doctors in democracies, they spin the news to engineer support. Uncovering this new brand of authoritarianism, Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman explain the rise of such “spin dictators,” describing how they emerge and operate, the new threats they pose, and how democracies should respond. Spin Dictators traces how leaders such as Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew and Peru's Alberto Fujimori pioneered less violent, more covert, and more effective methods of monopolizing power. They cultivated an image of competence, concealed censorship, and used democratic institutions to undermine democracy, all while increasing international engagement for financial and reputational benefits. The book reveals why most of today's authoritarians are spin dictators—and how they differ from the remaining “fear dictators” such as Kim Jong-un and Bashar al-Assad. Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century (Princeton UP, 2022) is aimed at a general audience, synthesizing a vast amount of qualitative and quantitative research by the authors and many other scholars. The book is highly readable, with a great mix of anecdotes and examples along with plain-English explanations of academic research findings. However, it also provides an excellent overview of contemporary global authoritarianism for academics. Almost every claim in the book has an endnote reference to the original research for those who want to follow up. The endnotes mean that despite its moderately intimidating 340-page heft, the main text is a very approachable 219 pages. Daniel Treisman is a professor of political science at the University of California, Los Angeles and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. His research focuses on Russian politics and economics as well as comparative political economy, including in particular the analysis of democratization, the politics of authoritarian states, political decentralization, and corruption. In 2021-22, he was a visiting fellow at Stanford University's Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and he was recently named a 2022 Andrew Carnegie Fellow. A graduate of Oxford University (B.A. Hons.) and Harvard University (Ph.D. 1995), he has published five books and numerous articles in leading political science and economics journals including The American Political Science Review and The American Economic Review, as well as in public affairs journals such as Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy. He has also served as a consultant for the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and USAID. In Russia, he has been a member of the International Advisory Committee of the Higher School of Economics and a member of the Jury of the National Prize in Applied Economics Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads a new Master's program in Applied Economics focused on the digital economy. His research focuses on the political economy and governance of China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Divya speaks with Saad Gulzar, Associate Professor of Political Science and Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. At the time of recording of this episode, he was at Princeton University and has since moved to Notre Dame. Gulzar's research focuses on the politics of development in South Asia and centers on a critical question: How can governments deliver better outcomes for their citizens? His work combines randomized control trials, administrative data, and in-depth qualitative insights to examine how political representation and bureaucracies can become more responsive. The conversation explores Gulzar's research on the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats, and the conditions under which their collaboration leads to more effective governance. Gulzar's findings highlight how the everyday decisions and motivations of these key actors shape the design and delivery of public policy. By uncovering these dynamics, his work offers valuable insights into how governments can better align expectations and improve the delivery of services in people's daily lives. References: Gulzar, S., Pathak, D., Thompson, S., & Toth, A. (2025). Can Party Elites Shape the Rank and File? Evidence from a Recruitment Campaign in India. American Political Science Review, 119(2), 812-831. Gulzar, S., & Khan, M. Y. (2025). Good politicians: Experimental evidence on motivations for political candidacy and government performance. Review of Economic Studies, 92(1), 339-364. Gulzar, S. (2021). Who enters politics and why?. Annual Review of Political Science, 24(1), 253-275. Gulzar, S., & Pasquale, B. J. (2017). Politicians, bureaucrats, and development: Evidence from India. American Political Science Review, 111(1), 162-183.    

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

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).

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

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 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.

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