Podcasts about euroskepticism

“To protect the future of liberal democracy in Europe, one must first understand its challengers.” So is the motto of AUTHLIB, the project titled ‘Neo-Authoritarianisms in Europe and the Liberal Democratic Response', led by the CEU Democracy Institute, funded by the European Union and the UK Innovation and Research, and implemented in cooperation with the Charles University, Sciences Po, Scuola Normale Superiore, SWPS University, the German Marshall Fund of the United States, the University of Oxford and the University of Vienna. If you are interested in fresh academic research and policy analysis on matters of illiberalism, populism, authoritarianism, and their implications to liberal democracy in Europe, follow AUTHLIB on social media and at authlib.eu. Among the challengers to liberal democracy in Europe, we can count populists, autocrats, and the increasingly often mentioned illiberals. But who are they and what is illiberalism? How does it relate to populism? Can illiberals be democrats at all? What are the policy implications of having illiberal politicians, especially of the radical right, in power in the EU? This interview explores these questions with Professor Cas Mudde. It covers various issues at the intersection of academic and policy research on populism, illiberalism, democracy, and the radical right. It discusses whether the growing body of literature on illiberalism addresses something that is fundamentally new on the global political agenda, how this literature relates to academic research on populism, and if illiberalism and democracy is reconcilable against the backdrop of a global trend of autocratization, which many scholars of democracy have noted and which is often attributed to illiberal and populist leaders. Furthermore, the conversation sets out to understand how the recent election outcomes in Slovakia and Poland fit into the aforementioned trend and also predict what is in store for European democracies in the near future as illiberal actors of the radical right are readying themselves for the next European parliamentary elections in June 2024. Cas Mudde is a professor of international affairs and a distinguished research professor at the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. His academic research agenda centers around the question how liberal democracies can defend themselves against political challenges without undermining their core values. He has published widely on uncivil society, democratization, Euroskepticism, extremism, and the practices of political parties, especially those of far right and populist inclinations. This interview was conducted as a collaboration between The Review of Democracy and the research consortium "AUTHLIB - Neo-authoritarianisms in Europe and the liberal democratic response" by Zsuzsanna Vegh, visiting fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, in cooperation with Bálint Mikola, Post-doctoral Research Fellow at the CEU Democracy Institute.

Among the challengers to liberal democracy in Europe, we can count populists, autocrats, and the increasingly often mentioned illiberals. But who are they and what is illiberalism? How does it relate to populism? Can illiberals be democrats at all? What are the policy implications of having illiberal politicians, especially of the radical right, in power in the EU? This interview explores these questions with Professor Cas Mudde. It covers various issues at the intersection of academic and policy research on populism, illiberalism, democracy, and the radical right. It discusses whether the growing body of literature on illiberalism addresses something that is fundamentally new on the global political agenda, how this literature relates to academic research on populism, and if illiberalism and democracy are reconcilable against the backdrop of a global trend of autocratization, which many scholars of democracy have noted, and which is often attributed to illiberal and populist leaders. Furthermore, the conversation sets out to understand how the recent election outcomes in Slovakia and Poland fit into the aforementioned trend and also predict what is in store for European democracies in the near future as illiberal actors of the radical right are readying themselves for the next European parliamentary elections in June 2024. Cas Mudde is a professor of international affairs and a distinguished research professor at the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. His academic research agenda centres around the question how liberal democracies can defend themselves against political challenges without undermining their core values. He has published widely on uncivil society, democratization, Euroskepticism, extremism, and the practices of political parties, especially those of far-right and populist inclinations.

In this episode, Anita interviews Joseph Asunka, the CEO of Afrobarometer, about democracy in Africa. Afrobarometer is “a pan-African, non-partisan survey research network that has been conducting public attitude surveys on democracy, governance, the economy, and society since 1999.” Before joining Afrobarometer, Asunka was previously a program officer in the Global Development and Population program at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and a lecturer in political science at UCLA.We also discuss the aftermath of Pelosi's trip to Taiwan and whether it has led to a new normal in the Taiwan Strait. We look at the specter of populism in Italy, as well as Kenya's third democratic election and what it portends for the future of East Africa. We wrap up the show by looking at the non-aligned movement and why these countries refuse to take sides in the Russia-Ukraine war.Articles and Resources Mentioned in EpisodeRyan's article in War on the RocksReviving the Petroleum Administration for War: A Case for Government-Industry Partnership (War on the Rocks)Rising US-China tensions over TaiwanXi Jinping may attack Taiwan to secure his legacy, warn Admiral Lee Hsi-min and Eric Lee (The Economist)How the crisis over Taiwan will change US-China relations (The Economist)Analysis: China's sharper focus on military option for Taiwan raises risks with U.S. (Reuters)Election Roundup: Italy and KenyaCan anything stop Italy's radical right? (The Economist)Leaked manifesto: Italian right-wingers will dump Euroskepticism in bid for power (Politico)Italy's Meloni, leading in polls, says she is no threat (Reuters)Why Kenya's election is going down to the wire (The Economist)Democracy in Africa: Interview with Joseph AsunkaHow do Global South politics of non-alignment and solidarity explain South Africa's position on Ukraine? (Brookings)Follow UsShow Website: www.kelloggsglobalpolitics.comShow Twitter: @GlobalKelloggShow YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgJeUZcTUGsNwTh-us65cIAAnita's Twitter: https://twitter.com/arkelloggAnita's Website:https://www.anitakellogg.com/Anita's email: anita@kelloggsglobalpolitics.comRyan's email: ryan@kelloggsglobalpolitics.com

Denmark on Wednesday voted to overturn its opt-out of the E.U.'s common defense policy, reversing three decades of Euroskepticism regarding security matters. The move is the latest sign of the West coalescing in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Some 66.9% of voters cast referendum ballots in favor of abandoning the opt-out—first negotiated in 1992—meaning Danish officials can now participate in E.U. defense discussions and the country's armed forces can deploy on E.

Today on Scope Conditions, we're talking about the origins of supranational power.The European Union has no army. It levies no taxes. Covering a population of 450 million, its administrative bureaucracy is on par with that of a moderate-sized city. And yet the EU's treaties, directives, and regulations – 50,000 pages worth – are enforced daily across Europe, covering domains from labor relations to financial markets to immigration, consumer protection, and pharmaceuticals. What's more, EU law trumps national law. Judges – national judges – strike down actions by their own governments when those actions contravene EU rules. So how did Europe get here? How did European law – which didn't even exist 70 years ago – become supreme, in a very concrete sense, across 27 independent states?As our guest argues, it wasn't overzealous, activist judges who made European law supreme. In fact, in the early decades of European law, most judges knew little about it and preferred not to go near it, let alone overrule their own country's policies in its name. Dr. Tommaso Pavone, an assistant professor of Law and Politics at the University of Arizona, tells us that the real architects of EU ascendancy were a ragtag band of entrepreneurial lawyers – lawyers who worked behind the scenes to coax reluctant judges into referring cases up to the European Court of Justice – even to the point of writing the judges' referrals for them. We have a fantastic conversation with Tom about his forthcoming book, The Ghostwriters: Lawyers and the Politics behind the Judicial Construction of Europe. In the book, Tom tells the story of a scattered set of actors whom he calls the “Euro-lawyers”: a group of attorneys who had survived the calamity of World War II and believed in the liberal project of European integration. The Euro-lawyers saw that – by crafting the right test cases, educating judges in European law, and sometimes literally ghostwriting their referrals and judgments – they could set in motion a juridical logic that would turn ordinary national courts into street-level enforcers of EU law. This is a conversation about how on-the-ground actors – who have little formal authority of their own – can bring about massive macro-institutional change by identifying and exploiting ambiguities in the rules of the game. We also talk with Tom about how the argument of his book took shape. He tells us about the moment when the whole direction of the project shifted, from a study of the judges who signed the referrals to an examination of the lawyers who put them up to it. We talk about how he reconstructed the behind-the-scenes work of 12 teams of attorneys who, in the key period, solicited almost half of all referrals to the European Court of Justice. And we press Tom on what all of this Euro-lawyering means for democracy. How should we feel about the fact that the European project emerged, in part, from the stratagems of these unelected elites operating by stealth? And what about today's Euro-lawyers? In an era of mounting Euroskepticism and rising populism, is there scope for them to leverage the European legal order to protect liberal institutions from the predations of would-be authoritarians?

Highlights:  “The EU’s vaccine fiasco, it’s provoking a new wave of Euroskepticism that’s sweeping the continent.”“We’re now seeing polls shift decisively in favor of an anti-EU sentiment among Italians and these euroskeptical attitudes are contributing to enormous instability right now in the Italian government.”“Given the vaccine company Astra-Zeneca is Swedish, there’s obviously some disillusionment among these Swedish populations over why they’ve had to wait for vaccination.”“It’s no coincidence that pundits are predicting that France will most likely be the next nation to leave the European Union.”“The Covid-19 outbreak has done far more than weaken immune systems and stretch medical facilities to their limit, it appears that the virus may end up being fatal to the European Union itself.”Timestamps:      [01:39] The growing Euroskepticism throughout the continent [02:10] How the vaccine fiasco is fueling the growing hostility against the EU [03:45] On a study that show Italians want to leave the EU and the Eurozone[05:40] The instability in Italian government and what they’re doing to avoid a snap election[06:12] On the renewed talk of Swexit in Sweden and why Netherlands also want to leave EU[07:23] The massive protests in response to EU’s draconian Covid lockdowns[09:04] How France may hold a Frexit referendum  Resources: Download your own ‘Fake News Antidote’ Ebook for FREE here: https://antidote.turleytalks.com/free-ebookEvaluate your cybersecurity today with Graybeard Security! Book your personal security analysis by using the Dark Web Scanner for FREE at turleytalks.graybeardsecurity.ioGet Hemp Fusion’s sleep supplement with 25% OFF plus 10 FREE travel packs of Hemp Fusion’s stress products using the code ‘WINNING’ at  hempfusion.comFight back against Big Tech CENSORSHIP! Subscribe to my GAB PLATFORM: https://gab.com/turley-talksSubscribe to my Brand-New RUMBLE Channel here: https://rumble.com/c/DrSteveTurleyFind me on BITCHUTE: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/vEzYfW0ALXeNBecome a Turley Talks Insiders Club Member: https://insidersclub.turleytalks.com/welcomeThank you for taking the time to listen to this episode.  If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and/or leave a review.Do you want to be a part of the podcast and be our sponsor? Click here to partner with us and defy liberal culture!If you would like to get lots of articles on conservative trends make sure to LIKE Dr. Steve Turley’s Facebook Page and sign-up for the 'New Conservative Age Rising' Email Alerts. 

Political infighting is nothing new in Brussels, but facing the Covid-19 pandemic European leaders have been far from united. Conflict Zone's Tim Sebastian asks European Commissioner Ylva Johansson if the EU has suffered a major blow over its disunity.

The attempt by the media and the political elites of the three major political parties in the United Kingdom to heap contempt on Euroskepticism no longer possesses the same power. With the victory of the United Kingdom Independence Party in local and European Parliamentary elections, the prospect of the UK leaving the European Union is […]

It can often feel hopeless to be an activist seeking social change on an obscure issue where most people seem opposed or at best indifferent to you. But according to a new book by Professor Cass Sunstein, they shouldn't despair. Large social changes are often abrupt and unexpected, arising in an environment of seeming public opposition. The Communist Revolution in Russia spread so swiftly it confounded even Lenin. Seventy years later the Soviet Union collapsed just as quickly and unpredictably. In the modern era we have gay marriage, #metoo and the Arab Spring, as well as nativism, Euroskepticism and Hindu nationalism. How can a society that so recently seemed to support the status quo bring about change in years, months, or even weeks? Sunstein — co-author of Nudge, Obama White House official, and by far the most cited legal scholar of the late 2000s — aims to unravel the mystery and figure out the implications in his new book How Change Happens. He pulls together three phenomena which social scientists have studied in recent decades: preference falsification, variable thresholds for action, and group polarisation. If Sunstein is to be believed, together these are a cocktail for social shifts that are chaotic and fundamentally unpredictable. • Links to learn more, summary and full transcript. • 80,000 Hours Annual Review 2018. • How to donate to 80,000 Hours. In brief, people constantly misrepresent their true views, even to close friends and family. They themselves aren't quite sure how socially acceptable their feelings would have to become, before they revealed them, or joined a campaign for social change. And a chance meeting between a few strangers can be the spark that radicalises a handful of people, who then find a message that can spread their views to millions. According to Sunstein, it's "much, much easier" to create social change when large numbers of people secretly or latently agree with you. But 'preference falsification' is so pervasive that it's no simple matter to figure out when that's the case. In today's interview, we debate with Sunstein whether this model of cultural change is accurate, and if so, what lessons it has for those who would like to shift the world in a more humane direction. We discuss: • How much people misrepresent their views in democratic countries. • Whether the finding that groups with an existing view tend towards a more extreme position would stand up in the replication crisis. • When is it justified to encourage your own group to polarise? • Sunstein's difficult experiences as a pioneer of animal rights law. • Whether activists can do better by spending half their resources on public opinion surveys. • Should people be more or less outspoken about their true views? • What might be the next social revolution to take off? • How can we learn about social movements that failed and disappeared? • How to find out what people really think. Get this episode by subscribing to our podcast on the world’s most pressing problems: type 80,000 Hours into your podcasting app. Or read the transcript on our site. The 80,000 Hours Podcast is produced by Keiran Harris.

This lecture asks whether nationalism and European integration are on a collision course. It covers the origin and design of the main institutions of the European Union. Next, I consider the rising opposition to European integration since the early 1990s, evident in survey data and popular votes on new Treaties, up to the British 'in/out' referendum, scheduled for 2016-17. What explains Euroskepticism, and what is the future of the European unification project?

Nathan, Mike and Mahler talk about regenerating tissue, time running out, Egypt, a candy tycoon, Russian shale oil, Euroskepticism, a Russian circus crocodile, BlackShades, Sabu, core interests, death row guidelines, videotaping all gun sales, 9/11 dog vests, and Sriracha.

University of Oklahoma Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students Clarke Stroud joins Suzette Grillot again on their European tour to discuss the concept of “euroskepticism” and the European Union's parliamentary elections. Later, a conversation with UCLA historian Nile Green about putting Islam into the context of global history. He says the same religious fragmentation that causes sectarian violence in the Middle East leads to religious misunderstanding in the West.

Rebroadcast: this episode was originally released in June 2019. It can often feel hopeless to be an activist seeking social change on an obscure issue where most people seem opposed or at best indifferent to you. But according to a new book by Professor Cass Sunstein, they shouldn't despair. Large social changes are often abrupt and unexpected, arising in an environment of seeming public opposition. The Communist Revolution in Russia spread so swiftly it confounded even Lenin. Seventy years later the Soviet Union collapsed just as quickly and unpredictably. In the modern era we have gay marriage, #metoo and the Arab Spring, as well as nativism, Euroskepticism and Hindu nationalism. How can a society that so recently seemed to support the status quo bring about change in years, months, or even weeks? Sunstein - co-author of Nudge, Obama White House official, and by far the most cited legal scholar of the late 2000s - aims to unravel the mystery and figure out the implications in his new book How Change Happens. He pulls together three phenomena which social scientists have studied in recent decades: preference falsification, variable thresholds for action, and group polarisation. If Sunstein is to be believed, together these are a cocktail for social shifts that are chaotic and fundamentally unpredictable.Links to learn more, summary and full transcript. In brief, people constantly misrepresent their true views, even to close friends and family. They themselves aren't quite sure how socially acceptable their feelings would have to become, before they revealed them, or joined a campaign for social change. And a chance meeting between a few strangers can be the spark that radicalises a handful of people, who then find a message that can spread their views to millions. According to Sunstein, it's "much, much easier" to create social change when large numbers of people secretly or latently agree with you. But 'preference falsification' is so pervasive that it's no simple matter to figure out when that's the case. In today's interview, we debate with Sunstein whether this model of cultural change is accurate, and if so, what lessons it has for those who would like to shift the world in a more humane direction. We discuss: * How much people misrepresent their views in democratic countries. * Whether the finding that groups with an existing view tend towards a more extreme position would stand up in the replication crisis. * When is it justified to encourage your own group to polarise? * Sunstein's difficult experiences as a pioneer of animal rights law. * Whether activists can do better by spending half their resources on public opinion surveys. * S