Democracy Paradox

Justin Kempf

Is it possible for a democracy to govern undemocratically? Can the people elect an undemocratic leader? Is it possible for democracy to bring about authoritarianism? And if so, what does this say about democracy? My name is Justin Kempf. Every week I talk to the brightest minds on subjects like international relations, political theory, and history to explore democracy from every conceivable angle. Topics like civil resistance, authoritarian successor parties, and the autocratic middle class challenge our ideas about democracy. Join me as we unravel new topics every week.

Subscribe Listen in podnod RSS feed Show website

235 episodes
Updated Today

Support the show

Support this Podcast

Goes straight to the publisher. podnod takes nothing.

Episodes235

Newest first

Feb 2, 2021 · 48 min
Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the Plutocratic Populism of the Republican Party
A transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com. Democracy depends on distinctions between political parties. Every election they offer clear choices on economic proposals. In recent years, cultural issues have added a new dimension to the polarization of American politics. But the 2020 election added a dangerous dimension to the political divide. The Republican Party has begun to question the integrity of elections and the value of democracy itself. It is not clear how far the Republican Party intends to widen this issue, but the ramifications are dangerous for constitutional government. So how did we get to this point? Has the Republican Party radically transformed after four years of Donald Trump or has this been the inevitable trajectory of Republican policies and ideology? Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson have studied the Republican Party for two decades. In their book Let them Eat Tweets: How the Right Rules in an Age of Extreme Inequality they consider how conservative economic policies have shifted the Republican Party further to the right on issues related to economics, race, and democracy itself. Jacob Hacker is a professor of political science at Yale University and Paul Pierson is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. We discuss the relationship between inequality and democracy, American politics, and the possibilities for change in the Republican Party. Related Content Lee Drutman Makes the Case for Multiparty Democracy in America William G. Howell and Terry M. Moe on the Presidency Thoughts on Jonathan Hopkin's Anti-System Politics Support the show
Jan 26, 2021 · 45 min
Bryn Rosenfeld on Middle Class Support for Dictators in Autocratic Regimes
A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com. Barrington Moore famously claimed, “No bourgeoisie. No democracy.” Many scholars before and after Moore have argued the middle class is necessary for successful democratization. But Moore had a specific image of the middle class. The bourgeoisie were not simply white-collar professionals. They were entrepreneurs who were independent of the landed aristocracy. Bryn Rosenfeld recognizes a new source for the growth of the middle class. Many authoritarian regimes have established a state dependent middle class. A professional class who relies on the state bureaucracy for employment and think differently about their relationship to the regime than the bourgeoisie Barrington Moore portrayed. Scholars have long recognized the heterogeneity of the middle class even while they described them as a homogenous group. The diverse interests and perspectives are part of what leads the middle class to demand democracy. But Bryn Rosenfeld finds there is also an autocratic middle class who rely on the state for their status and position. They view the process of democratization as a labyrinth of risk and uncertainty. Bryn Rosenfeld is an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University. She is the author of The Autocratic Middle Class: How State Dependency Reduces the Demand for Democracy. Bryn is part of a new generation of comparative political scientists who blend field research with rigorous quantitative research designs to produce new insights into political behavior. I have read my share of books on democracy published in 2020. Some are well-written. Others offer deep insights. So far, this is the most consequential book on democracy I have come across from last year. I do not doubt scholars will refer to its conclusions for years to come. It astonishes me this is Bryn’s first book. I expect to come across her name again in the future. Related Content Paul Robinson on Russian Conservatism Erica Chenoweth on Civil Resistance Thoughts on Barrington Moore's Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy Support the show
Jan 19, 2021 · 56 min
Zizi Papacharissi Dreams of What Comes After Democracy
Political theorist Takis Pappas has described the formation of liberal democracy as an elite project. Its creation was dependent on the decisions of political leaders rather than the public. But over the subsequent decades the space between politicians and their constituents has grown smaller. It is now unclear whether elected officials remain political leaders or whether they simply follow the opinions of their constituents. Democracy is in the process of a transformation. Politicians have abdicated responsibility for political power to the people, but the people do not share a sense of responsibility for this newfound political power. So, everyone blames each other for political conflict, but nobody accepts the responsibility to resolve it. It is not clear anyone completely understands what democracy is or what it will become. Robert Dahl imagined the possibility of a third transformation of democracy into something deeper, thicker, and richer. But he never explained how this new sense of democracy might manifest itself. Dahl thought more about democracy than anyone has before or since. So I have searched for the next incarnation of Robert Dahl but have failed to discover her or him. These conversations are my attempt to piece together the ideas from multiple perspectives about democracy to offer an updated theory of democratic governance. Populism, of course, is the great challenge for democracy today. Many scholars have offered institutional solutions as an antidote to populism. But the challenges democracy faces are not an American problem. They exist across the globe. They persist in Presidential and Parliamentary systems. It is a deeper challenge within the demos itself. I believe democracy will inevitably overcome the populist challenge. It will emerge from this crisis stronger and healthier. Fifty years from now democracy will be different than it is today. And in five hundred years, its institutions may even be unrecognizable. But I believe the answer exists. Zizi Papacharissi has dared to imagine what our future may hold after democracy. The research for her remarkable book, After Democracy, took her around the world where she asked one hundred everyday citizens three simple questions: 1. What is democracy? 2. What is citizenship? 3. What might make democracy better? The answers she received helped her imagine what might come after democracy. Zizi offers us a dream. She explained to me that she “wanted the book to have a dream-like feel, like a dream many people were having together or a polyphonic story they were simultaneously telling and listening to.” Zizi Papacharissi is a professor of communication and political science at the University of Illinois-Chicago. She was among the first to study social media and has shaped the scholarship on political communication on the internet. Her name is a familiar sighting in the footnotes of many of the books and articles I read. Our conversation explores the ideas in her book from many different angles. We talk about the meaning of democracy and the role of citizens. We think about how democracy might be reimagined. And she invites you to dream of what might come after democracy. Notes Website: www.democracyparadox.com Music from Apes of the State Related Content Hélène Landemore on Democracy without Elections Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan Support the show
Jan 12, 2021 · 56 min
Winston Mano on Social Media and Politics in Africa... And what America can Learn from Africa about Democracy
Recent events in the United States have shown how even the most established democracies have much to learn about democracy. But my guest Winston Mano does not like to talk about democracy. He prefers to talk about democratization because the process never ends. Our conversation focuses on Africa with many topics discussed including social media, decolonization, and, of course, democracy. It concludes with a complex question, “What can America learn about democracy from Africa?” When I ask this question, it is not intended to embarrass Americans, but to look for insights from abroad. Winston believes humility is critical in a successful democracy. Different parts of the globe have different lessons so there is always something to learn from others. But for those who believe democratization is a linear process, my question won’t make any sense at all. America is widely viewed as farther along this process than any African nation. But Winston points out how technologies develop out of necessity. Some cultures “leapfrog” steps to develop new technologies outside the traditional sequence. Africa has even done this before. For example, Africa never experienced a Bronze Age. It went immediately into an Iron Age. So, can Africa leapfrog America at this crossroads of democratization? I have no idea. But the current crisis of democracy requires a transformation in how it is both imagined and approached. So, the solutions may come from unlikely sources. Winston Mano is a reader at the University of Westminster. He is also the principal editor of the Journal of African Media Studies. Alongside Martin Ndella, he edited the recent two volume publication Social Media and Elections in Africa. Today’s conversation begins on the topic of social media in Africa. This is where I thought the conversation would remain. But recent events made it impossible to avoid a wider conversation on democracy. Notes Website: www.democracyparadox.com Music from Apes of the State Related Content Jonathan Pinckney on Civil Resistance Transitions George Lawson on Revolution Thoughts on Florence Brisset-Foucault's Talkative Polity Support the show
Jan 5, 2021 · 54 min
Michael Hughes on the History of Democracy in Germany
The German Question haunted international relations for generations. Like China, it was a rising authoritarian power. But its successful democratization after the Second World War cast an amnesia upon the uncertainty and anxiety it had caused the international community. Today democracy in Germany is taken for granted. It is a force of democratic stability within Europe and in the world. Its journey from dictatorship to democracy is largely forgotten and its current challenges are often ignored. Some of those challenges have surfaced in recent years. Hessian politician, Walter Lübcke , was assassinated by a far right extremist on June 2nd, 2019 and in August The New York Times reported that Neo-Nazis have established a presence in the ranks of the military and police. Today’s guest Michael Hughes offers a helpful reminder, “Democracy may have prevailed in Germany… but conceptions remain contested… So, crucially, the story’s outcome cannot be an ending… for the process remains ongoing.” Michael is a professor of History at Wake Forest University. His research has focused on 19th and 20th Century German history. He is the author of the forthcoming book, Embracing Democracy in Modern Germany: Political Citizenship and Participation, 1871-2000. I liked Michael’s book because it approaches history like political science. It focuses on the development of democracy through political culture. It is a thicker conception of democracy that goes beyond constitutions and institutions to consider democratization as a process. My plan is to touch on the different regimes throughout Modern Germany’s history, but I also keep a focus on big picture trends. Don’t worry if you are not familiar with Germany. This is a good introduction, but more importantly this is about the process of democratization. The challenges and successes that countries face. This is how I chose to begin 2021. Looking back through history before we begin to move forward. Notes Website: www.democracyparadox.com Music from Apes of the State Related Content Paul Robinson on Russian Conservatism Yael Tamir on Nationalism Thoughts on Sheri Berman's Democracy and Dictatorship in Europe: From the Ancien Régime to the Present Day Support the show
Dec 29, 2020 · 47 min
Lee Drutman Makes the Case for Multiparty Democracy in America
Madison’s Federalist 10 makes an unusual case. He argued the size and diversity of the United States is a critical safeguard against the dominance of any single faction. Of course, it is well-known that the Founding Fathers were wary of all factions, political parties and, most of all, the tyranny of the majority. The American constitution is even described as counter majoritarian, because multiple avenues exist for entrenched minorities to prevail in the legislative process. But Madison was different. While he is credited as the father of the constitution, he was among the most majoritarian of all the founding fathers. Still Madison was wary of strong, overwhelming majorities. He saw regional diversity as a check against majoritarianism. The size and diversity of the new nation meant any meaningful majority would be the result of significant compromise and deliberation. Unfortunately, the two-party system, as it exists today, has undermined the Madisonian vision in Federalist 10. The two political parties fight for overwhelming majorities, but the inability of either party to prevail causes gridlock rather than compromise. Necessary reforms are stalled or delayed as they become rallying cries in a never-ending campaign cycle. This was never Madison’s intention. Lee Drutman offers a solution to transform American democracy. His book Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America argues for proportional representation of the legislature and ranked-choice voting for the Presidency. But his intention is not about any one reform. Instead, his goal is to produce a multiparty democracy where no single party commands an absolute majority. You may recognize Lee Drutman from articles he has written in The New York Times, Vox, and Five Thirty-Eight. He is also a Senior Fellow in the Political Reform Program at New America and a cohost of the podcast Politics in Question alongside Julia Azari and James Wallner. The idea of multiparty democracy in the United States can seem radical, but like most reformers Drutman is a traditionalist at heart. He finds his inspiration in Madison’s vision of the American political system. Rather than designing something novel, Lee believes his reforms bring America closer to the original aims of the Founding Fathers. The United States has grown in its size and diversity. Nonetheless, the two political parties have reduced politics to a single dimension. Ultimately, Lee believes a more diverse party system is necessary to represent a diverse population. It’s a Madisonian case for the challenges of polarization and partisanship. Related Content William G. Howell and Terry M. Moe on the Presidency Donald F. Kettl on Federalism Thoughts on Suzanne Mettler and Robert Lieberman's Four Threats Support the show
Dec 22, 2020 · 52 min
Hélène Landemore on Democracy without Elections
The origin of the third wave of democratization is commonly dated to the Carnation Revolution in Portugal in 1974. The fall of the Soviet Union accelerated this process until about 2005 when the pace began to slow and it even began to reverse. But Robert Dahl thought about waves of democratization differently. He believed a democratic wave was more like a transformation. It was an intensification rather than a proliferation of democracy. Dahl allows us to interpret the current rise of populism around the world not as a rejection of democracy, but as a challenge as democratic governance and ideals continue to evolve and transform. Or as Hélène Landemore puts it, “What you call the “crisis” of democracy can also be read as the growing pains of a system trying to adjust to the constraints of a globalized economy, an interconnected world, and rising democratic expectations.” Hélène Landemore offers an alternative approach to imagine democratic governance. It is a democracy without elections or politicians. She calls it an Open Democracy. It relies on representative assemblies where members are selected through lottery kind of like a jury. Her approach encourages deliberation among ordinary citizens who better represent their communities and societies. Many advocates have already embraced this novel approach. and it has already used in limited ways. We talk quite a bit about political theory, but also some real-world applications of these ideas. Indeed, Landemore has found inspiration in many of these examples like the constitutional assembly in Iceland or France’s citizen assembly on climate change. So these mini publics offer a novel way to consider the possibilities for democratic government without elections. Hélène Landemore is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Yale University. She is the author of the book Open Democracy: Reinventing Popular Rule for the Twenty-First Century. Her research reconsiders the meaning of representation and legitimacy. Robert Dahl was unclear of what the next transformation of democracy would become. I feel the same uncertainty. But I believe Hélène Landemore challenges us to consider new experiments in democracy happening right now. So perhaps a third transformation of democracy has already begun. Related Content Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell on Mending Democracy John Gastil and Katherine Knobloch on Citizen Initiative Review Thoughts on Cristina Flesher Fominaya's Democracy Reloaded Support the show
Dec 15, 2020 · 48 min
Glenn Tiffert on the Manipulation of Academia by Foreign Governments
This week America discovered some startling news. Russians hacked into the email systems of the Commerce and Treasury Departments. The information age has brought about a new era of intelligence and espionage. This was a blatant act of theft, but more subtle forms of espionage are available. Globalization has left many institutions vulnerable to foreign manipulation. I invited Glenn Tiffert from the Hoover Institution to shed light on this phenomenon through a discussion of two of his recent publications. He is the editor of Global Engagement: Rethinking Risk in the Research Enterprise. It is an examination of the ways academic collaboration with China exposes vulnerabilities in our National Defense. It features a forward from former National Security Advisor, H.R. McMaster, and an introduction from icon of democracy scholarship, Larry Diamond. The second publication is a report from the National Endowment for Democracy. It is titled, “Compromising the Knowledge Economy: Authoritarian Challenges to Independent Intellectual Inquiry.” This report explains how authoritarian regimes use sharp power to influence academic institutions. Universities are the heart of political discourse in free societies. E.B. White once wrote, “The reading room of a college library is the very temple of democracy.” When foreign governments manipulate Western academia, it challenges an important source of democratic legitimacy. Larry Diamond explains, “This is more than a national security threat: It is an existential challenge to the entire global liberal order.” Globalization has not simply brought about economic interdependence. It has extended the boundaries of political influence. The United States has long had the advantage of soft power to inspire people around the world. China has now found a form of sharp power to influence the United States in turn. The global order continues to change and evolve so it is incumbent on us to strengthen liberalism and democracy to overcome these challenges. This conversation shares themes with recent episodes that featured John Ikenberry on liberal internationalism and Mareike Ohlberg on the Chinese Communist Party. This is a topic with multiple dimensions. It combines elements of national security with cornerstone values such as liberalism and democracy. Related Content Mareike Ohlberg on the Global Influence of the Chinese Communist Party John Ikenberry on Liberal Internationalism On the Global Ascendance of China More from Glenn Tiffert Global Engagement: Rethinking Risk in the Research Enterprise Compromising the Knowledge Economy: Authoritarian Challenges to Independent Intellectual Inquiry The Authoritarian Assault on Knowledge Support the show
Dec 8, 2020 · 1 hr 4 min
Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell on Mending Democracy
There is a book that was written in 1989 called Democracy and its Critics. The renowned Robert Dahl is the author. In the book, he answers objections to critiques of democracy through a series of dialogues. One of them has stuck with me because I hear it so often: The problem with democracy is it is not democratic enough. Many of the scholars who are featured on the Democracy Paradox have ideas or plans to make democracy more democratic. Many books, articles, and podcasts focus on ways to reform or redesign institutions so they can become more democratic. For example, Ezra Klein has a popular podcast. Every week he advocates for the Senate to drop the filibuster. Sure. Let’s do it. But we are delusional if we believe democracy is one reform away from perfection. I invited Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan, and John Boswell to join me because they examine democracy reform through a multidimensional lens. Rather than offering a single blueprint to redesign our institutions, they suggest we should continue to mend the damage in our existing framework. It is an achievable call to action where they raise the profile of some everyday heroes who have made positive contributions to repair the connections vital to democracy. Carolyn is an Associate Professor of Public Policy and Governance at Australian National University, Selen is an Associate Professor of Politics at the University of Canberra, and John is an Associate Professor of Politics at the University of Southampton. They are the authors of Mending Democracy: Democratic Repair in Disconnected Times. It’s always interesting when my guests are in Australia because it works best for me to call in the afternoon or evening so they can be reached the morning of the next day. This conversation had an extra wrinkle because John is in the UK so we coordinated this call across three time zones on three continents. Whenever this many people are on a podcast, it can become difficult to know who says what. For that I apologize. But it was necessary. Their work was a collaborative effort. Indeed, a work like theirs cannot be anything but collaborative. Their research is, in many ways, about collaboration. Our conversation will introduce some important concepts and theories about deliberative democracy. But it also offers some real-world examples. I cannot wait for you to learn about the Knitting Nanas Against Gas. They call themselves KNAG. There is so much I want to share right now. But it’s best if I relax and just let you listen. Notes Website: www.democracyparadox.com Music from Apes of the State Relevant Past Episodes John Gastil and Katherine Knobloch on Citizen Initiative Review Jill Long Thompson on Character in a Democracy Relevant Articles on Democracy Paradox Thoughts on Adam Przeworski's Crises of Democracy Thoughts on E.B. White's On Democracy Thoughts on Florence Brisset-Foucault's Talkative Polity Support the show
Dec 1, 2020 · 48 min
Mareike Ohlberg on the Global Influence of the Chinese Communist Party
Last October Houston Rockets GM Daryl Morey shook the sports world with a tweet. It said, “Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong.” Pretty simple. Not controversial…. at least, not controversial in the United States. But China was offended. They cut off all economic ties with the Rockets and demanded an apology from the National Basketball Association. And they got one. China uses its economic clout to shape the public discourse in business, academia, politics, and even sports. Its authoritarian impulse has no boundaries. Even citizens of liberal democracies are subject to its influence. This is the third part of “Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism” about the global ascendance of China. My conversation with Mareike Ohlberg, a Senior Fellow at the German Marshall Fund, explores how the Communist Party of China extends its influence beyond its borders. She recently authored the book Hidden Hand: Exposing How the Chinese Communist Party is Reshaping the World with Clive Hamilton. They write in the opening lines of the first chapter, “The Chinese Communist Party is determined to transform the international order, to shape the world in its own image, without a shot being fired.” China is imagined as a powerful, authoritarian state. Francis Fukuyama has described it as a strong state with weak rule of law. I disagree. China is a weak state with a strong party. Xi Jinping is described as the President of China, but his real power comes from his role as the Chairman of the Communist Party. The power of the CCP is neither subtle nor indirect. For example, the military is not a part of the government. It is a branch of the CCP. China’s global ascendance is the ascendance of China’s Communist Party. It does not matter whether the CCP is committed to Marxism or Communism. The reality is it has always been authoritarian. It has never been supportive of liberalism nor democracy. Recently, The Economist observed, “The achievement of the Trump administration was to recognize the authoritarian threat from China. The task of the Biden administration will be to work out what to do about it.” There is a bipartisan consensus in the US that China represents a threat to America. Something must be done. We just need to figure out what that “something” is. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Michel de Certeau's classic The Practice of Everyday Life. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Nov 23, 2020 · 57 min
Xiaoyu Pu on China's Global Identities
China is a nation of contradictions. It is a developing economy that is an economic powerhouse. It is a rising power that is already a great power. It is a communist state that has embraced capitalism. The dualism of yin and yang is not simply an element of Chinese philosophy. It is a source of modern Chinese identity. This is part two of “Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism” about the global ascendance of China. Last week was about liberal internationalism. Next week will focus on the global influence of the Chinese Communist Party. Part 1 was about liberalism. Part 3 is about communism. This is Part 2 but it is not about capitalism. This week will explore how China’s different sources of identity shape its foreign policy. It is about how an illiberal state adapts to a liberal world order. I want to convey the nuance and complexity of modern China as it exists today. So this week is not about capitalism but the juxtaposition of capitalism and communism. It is about the reconciliation of its many contradictions. And it is about the challenges for China to continue to evolve and transform. The contradictions and complexities intrinsic to Chinese identity are present in its foreign policy. Xiaoyu Pu writes, “China’s grand strategy has no coherent blueprint, and there are competing visions for its emerging roles on the world stage. This is not to argue that Beijing has no grand strategy but rather that Beijing’s grand strategy includes contradictory elements.” Xiaoyu is an Associate Professor of political science at the University of Nevada, Reno and the author of Rebranding China: Contested Status Signaling in the Changing Global Order. There is a lot to worry about China’s global ascendance. But Xiaoyu believes much of the alarm is overblown. Let me restate that he does not believe there is no cause for concern, but he does offer an alternative perspective. Our conversation explores topics as diverse as the domestic politics in China to an analysis of its use of sharp power. We discuss not just China’s prospects for democratization, but whether China must democratize to become a dominant hegemonic power. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed John Dewey's classic Democracy and Education. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Nov 16, 2020 · 54 min
G. John Ikenberry on Liberal Internationalism
Democracy is often imagined at its purest at a micro level. Town hall meetings are sometimes imagined as a simpler form of democratic governance, so international relations can feel as though it is miles away from democracy. Andy yet, it is the international liberal order which has brought about the vast proliferation of democracy around the world. My guest, John Ikenberry, notes “Liberal democracy was both a national and an international project… Its institutions and ideals were premised on an expanding world of trade, exchange, and community.” Scholars talk about liberal democracy. Sometimes it is not clear whether liberalism depends on democracy or democracy depends on liberalism. It’s easy to assume liberalism is necessary to limit the dangers of democracy, but one of my favorite scholars, Sheri Berman, explains, “Liberalism unchecked by democracy can easily deteriorate into oligarchy or technocracy.” The two are linked. G. John Ikenberry has written about liberal internationalism since the 1980s. He is a giant in the field of international relations. He is a Professor of Politics and International Relations at Princeton University and the author of the new book A World Safe for Democracy: Liberal Internationalism and the Crisis of Global Order. Our conversation explores political theory and international theory, but also American history and current events. This is the first of my three-part episode arc about the global ascendance of China called “Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism.” We do not discuss China until the end of the conversation. This is not by accident. The purpose of this episode is to offer context. It’s impossible to grasp the impact of China until we explain the liberal international order and its importance. My hope is you will have a stronger sense of what is at stake as we discuss China with two different scholars who have very different perspectives. This is a great conversation and a wonderful introduction for the next two weeks. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Mark Beissinger's Nationalist Mobilization and the Collapse of the Soviet State. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Nov 9, 2020 · 56 min
Amy Erica Smith on Politics and Religion in Brazil
Political Scientist Seymour Martin Lipset wrote, “A person who knows only one country doesn't know any country because you're not sensitized to what is unique, what is different, what is special about your country.” Brazil offers a parallel to the United States because it has a populist President who is active on social media and has been indifferent to the pandemic and hostile to the environment. But it also has differences in culture, development, and religion. The past week has largely been about the American Presidential Election for me. Like most of you my attention was focused on the results until this past weekend when Joe Biden was officially declared the winner. But now I am exhausted talking about American politics, so I invited Amy Erica Smith to discuss politics in Brazil. She is the author of Religion and Brazilian Democracy: Mobilizing the People of God and a Professor of Political Science at Iowa State University. My conversation with Amy Erica is about Brazil, but in many ways, it is illuminating about the United States. Everyone will have theories about American politics after a consequential election. But an examination of other countries tests those assumptions in different contexts. Populist leaders have found success in many parts of the world, but Jair Bolsonaro feels eerily similar to Trump in so many ways. And yet, “Bolsonaro is a Brazilian invention.” Brian Winter writes in Foreign Affairs, “He is a product of the singularly awful economic and political crisis the country has endured over the last decade and, just as important, of Brazil’s long tradition of being ruled by conservative white men of military background.” The most striking of those similarities and differences is the way religion has interacted with politics in Brazil. Amy Erica’s research is amazing. She is a political scientist’s political scientist but also part of a new generation of scholars who combine field research with statistical analysis to give anecdotal observations new meaning. We cover a lot of ground in our conversation. We talk about Jair Bolsonaro. We discuss the Workers’ Party. We talk about Catholics, Evangelicals, and Pentecostals and... you really just need to listen. This episode marks the start of my second season. Each episode stands alone so there is no theme or topic for each season. But I do feel the podcast has grown in its production and sophistication over the past 20 episodes. And the new election gives me a chance to mark this growth with a new season of episodes. Next week begins the three part series "Liberalism, Capitalism, Communism" about the global ascendance of China. Stay tuned! Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Tom Ginsburg's Judicial Review in New Democracies. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Nov 2, 2020 · 51 min
William G. Howell and Terry M. Moe on the Presidency
Millions of Americans are voting for the President of the United States. Some of you will hear this episode before the election is over. Others will likely listen after the election is over. I hope my conversation with William Howell and Terry Moe will have relevance no matter when you listen. William is Chair of the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. Terry is a Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Our conversation explores their book Presidents, Populism, and the Crisis of Democracy. These are familiar topics for regular listeners of Democracy Paradox. William and Terry break from many critics of Donald Trump in their defense of the Presidency as an institution. They have tremendous faith in the Presidency to deliver effective governance. Many ideas have been considered as an antidote to populism. William and Terry believe effective government is the solution to the populist backlash. There is some truth in their argument. But more importantly, democracy must always strive for effective governance. Because unless democratic governance is synonymous with effectiveness, authoritarians have a justification for their rule. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 80 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Karl Marx's third volume of Capital. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Oct 28, 2020 · 52 min
Barbara Freese on Corporate Denial
Democratic values are about more than politics. They permeate throughout society and into the economy. Barbara Freese has examined how corporate leaders have not lived up to these values. She offers examples like the tobacco industry, the use of lead in gasoline, and global warming to demonstrate how they have avoided not just accountability but any sense of responsibility for behavior with catastrophic consequences. Barbara calls this phenomenon corporate denial and explains, “We should study corporate denial because corporations dominate our economy and shape our democracy, and for a huge proportion of Americans, corporate incentives, pressures, norms, and culture govern our work lives.” This is really a conversation about citizenship. We work hard to compartmentalize different parts of our life. Our behavior at work is not supposed to impact our neighbors or our community, but it can and often does. Ultimately, corporate denials do not come from corporations. They come from people viewed as leaders. And they erode the trust necessary for democratic governance. But we can restore that trust through honesty. Honesty with each other and honesty with ourselves. Barbara Freese is the author of Industrial Strength Denial: Eight Stories of Corporations Defending the Indefensible from the Slave Trade to Climate Change. She is an environmental attorney and a former Minnesota assistant attorney general. Her interest in corporate denial was sparked by cross-examining coal industry witnesses disputing the science of climate change. She lives in St. Paul. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed The Concept of the Political by Carl Schmitt. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Oct 18, 2020 · 48 min
Paul Robinson on Russian Conservatism
The Russian interference in the 2016 American Presidential election brought Russia to the forefront of conversations about international relations. But it has also given us a one-dimensional view of this complex country. Today’s conversation is about Russian Conservatism with historian Paul Robinson. We talk about conservatism as an ideology, we talk about its history, and we talk about the many dimensions of Russian Conservatism today that offer a complex and nuanced view. Our conversation is not an endorsement of Russian Conservatism. It is a largely undemocratic and anti-liberal school of thought. But even this statement is misleading because there are elements of democracy and liberalism in the ideas of some Russian Conservatives. Consider how your views on Russia change throughout its history. Today, it is largely considered conservative at least socially or culturally. But not long ago, it was Communist and associated with the far left. The reality is few of us have thought much about Russian political thought beyond broad generalizations. This podcast will scratch the surface on a particular political tradition but hopefully it offers a broader context as Russia becomes a topic in Western politics in the 2020 election and beyond. Paul Robinson is Professor of History of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa and the author of Russian Conservatism. He is author of several books, including The White Russian Army in Exile, 1920–1941, and co-author of Aiding Afghanistan. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Thanks to Cornell University Press for providing a copy of Russian Conservatism. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Crises of Democracy by Adam Przeworski. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Oct 12, 2020 · 56 min
John Matsusaka on National Referendums
The United States has a long tradition of direct democracy through referendums dating back to the early years of the republic. Nearly every state today has some form of referendums or ballot initiatives. Yet the United States has never had a national referendum. John Matsusaka points out that from a comparative perspective, this is unusual. Nearly all other democracies have held national referendums, and many have made them a regular part of their political process. Matsusaka emphasizes tradition should not be an obstacle. He writes, “American democracy is not a static system created by the Founders, but a work in progress, an evolving set of practices that each generation has updated, largely by extending the scope of popular participation.” I share an optimistic conversation with John Matsusaka about the possibilities for direct democracy. There is a little bit of talk about Brexit and a few other countries like Switzerland are mentioned, but we mainly focus on the United States. John thinks the time is past due to introduce direct democracy on the national level. He writes in his book, “Although the Founders got some things wrong, they got many things right. We would like to know if omitting direct democracy was one of the things they got right, or one of their mistakes.” John Matsusaka is the Charles F. Sexton Chair in American Enterprise at the University of Southern California and the author of Let the People Rule: How Direct Democracy Can Meet the Populist Challenge. An economist by training, he works on topics related to political economy, direct democracy, corporate finance, and corporate governance. His article, “Corporate Diversification, Value Maximization, and Organizational Capabilities,” was awarded the Merton Miller Prize for most significant paper by the Journal of Business; and his article "Ballot Order Effects in Direct Democracy Elections" received the Duncan Black Prize for best paper in Public Choice. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Thanks to James Schneider at Princeton University Press for my copy of Let the People Rule: How Direct Democracy Can Meet the Populist Challenge and for an introduction to John Matsusaka. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed On the Political by Chantal Mouffe. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Oct 4, 2020 · 57 min
Donald F. Kettl on Federalism
Federalism has become marginalized in academic literature. Everybody knows the United States depends on a federal system, but few talk about it. The nationalization of politics makes federalism feel esoteric and obsolete. My conversation with Donald Kettl explains why federalism remains vibrant and relevant. And it is necessary to understand American politics today as much as it has ever been. Listeners will find we talk about equality almost as much as federalism. Don writes in his book, The Divided States of America, “Federalism, instead of bridging the gaps in the polarization and inequality of the new century, fed and accelerated them.” He explains why federalism has failed to deliver and how it can be reimagined once again. This is a wide ranging conversation that spans history and current events. We discuss important topics like healthcare, environmental policy, and the pandemic. These issues all touch on different aspects of federalism. Donald Kettl is the Sid Richardson Professor at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, Austin and the author of The Divided States of America: Why Federalism Doesn't Work. Don has twice won the Louis Brownlow Book Award of the National Academy of Public Administration for The Transformation of Governance (2002); and System Under Stress: Homeland Security and American Politics (2005). His book, Escaping Jurassic Government: How to Recover America's Lost Commitment to Competence, won the 2016 award for book of the year from the American Society for Public Administration. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Thanks to James Schneider at Princeton University Press for my copy of The Divided States of America: Why Federalism Doesn't Work and for an introduction to Donald Kettl. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy by Suzanne Mettler and Robert C. Lieberman. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show
Oct 3, 2020 · 37 min
Recap of Resistance, Revolution, Democracy
Jenna Spinelle, co-host of Democracy Works, joins the Democracy Paradox as a guest host as Justin recaps the three-part episode arc "Resistance, Revolution, Democracy." The tables are turned as Justin is interviewed about his background, thoughts on democracy, and final ideas about the past three episodes. Jenna conducts the interviews for the award-winning podcast, Democracy Works. The McCourtney Institute of Democracy at Penn State University sponsors Democracy Works. It has been a fixture of those engaged in conversations about Democracy since 2018. Look for them wherever you listen to Democracy Paradox. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Look for tomorrow's conversation with Donald Kettl about his book The Divided States of America: Why Federalism Doesn't Work and look for the recent review of The Four Threats at www.democracyparadox.com. Support the show
Sep 27, 2020 · 1 hr 5 min
Jonathan Pinckney on Civil Resistance Transitions
Jonathan Pinckney is a program office with the Program on Nonviolent Action at the United States Institute of Peace and the author of From Dissent to Democracy: The Promise and Perils of Civil Resistance Transitions. This is the third part of a three episode arc called, "Resistance, Revolution, Democracy." My conversation with Erica Chenoweth explored the idea of civil resistance. The next week I was able to discuss revolutions with George Lawson. This conversation pulls these ideas together to consider how regime transitions can produce sustainable democracies. A few different regime transitions are discussed from around the world and throughout recent history. Towards the end we briefly discuss the United States Institute of Peace. I know many PhDs who struggle to break into academia. There are opportunities outside of universities. Jonathan offers a compelling option for some who are looking to establish a career in political science. Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed Friedrich Nietzsche's On the Genealogy of Morality. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes. Support the show